American Secession Project

Dedicated to placing secession in the mainstream of political thought as a viable solution to contemporary problems.

 

"The denial of the right to secede from a voluntary union is itself a primary justification for secession"

Project Status and How You Can Get Involved

Resources

American Secession Project Home
Secession Primer
Secession Theories
Application
Index of Secessionist Papers
Justifications for Secession
Legality of Secession
Secession Myths
Documents and Links
SP Blog
Search and News
Recommended Books
Contact
Get Involved
States' Rights - What a great idea!

States' Rights Bloggers' Alliance

Sign the Declaration of States' Rights

 

External

Middlebury Declaration
Secession.net
Philosophy and Secession
Free State Project
Middlebury Institute
Abbeville Institute
Southern Loyalist
States' Rights Review
Free States Blog
Shouting From the Mountaintop
Hawai'ian Independence Blog
Vermont Commons
New England Secession Blog
Conch Republic -humorous but they actually seceded
Scarlet Pimpernel

ASP In-depth State and Region pages

Alaska
Arizona
California
Cascadia
Hawai'i
New England
New Hampshire
North Carolina
South Carolina
Texas
Vermont

 

Burlington Declaration

Chattanooga Declaration

Declaration of States' Rights

2008 Secessionist Convention

Secessionist No. 18

Happy Secession Day

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo July 4, 2006

*rehosted here with the express permission of Mr. DiLorenzo, originally posted on Lew Rockwell.com
by Thomas J. D

Perhaps the best evidence of how American history was rewritten, Soviet style, in the post-1865 era is the fact that most Americans seem to be unaware that "Independence Day" was originally intended to be a celebration of the colonists’ secession from the British empire. Indeed, the word secession is not even a part of the vocabulary of most Americans, who more often than not confuse it with "succession." The Revolutionary War was America’s first war of secession.

America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to "alter or abolish" that government and "to institute a new government." The word "secession" was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word "separation" instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

The Declaration is also a states’ rights document (not surprisingly, since Jefferson was the intellectual inspiration for the American states’ rights political tradition). This, too, is foreign to most Americans. But read the final paragraph of the Declaration which states:

That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things which independent states may of right do (emphasis in original).

Each colony was considered to be a free and independent state, or nation, in and of itself. There was no such thing as "the United States of America" in the minds of the founders. The independent colonies were simply united for a particular cause: seceding from the British empire. Each individual state was assumed to possess all the rights that any state possesses, even to wage war and conclude peace. Indeed, when King George III finally signed a peace treaty he signed it with all the individual American states, named one by one, and not something called "The United States of America." The "United States" as a consolidated, monopolistic government is a fiction invented by Lincoln and instituted as a matter of policy at gunpoint and at the expense of some 600,000 American lives during 1861–1865.

Jefferson defended the right of secession in his first inaugural address by declaring, "If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it." (In sharp contrast, in his first inaugural address, Lincoln promised an "invasion" with massive "bloodshed" (his words) of any state that failed to collect the newly-doubled federal tariff rate by seceding from the union).

Jefferson made numerous statements in defense of the defining principal of the American Revolution: the right of secession. In a January 29, 1804 letter to Dr. Joseph Priestly he wrote:

Whether we remain in one confederacy, or form into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I believe not very important to the happiness of either part. Those of the western confederacy will be as much our children & descendants as those of the eastern, and I feel myself as much identified with that country, in future time, as with this; and did I now foresee a separation [i.e., secession] at some future day, yet I should feel the duty & the desire to promote the western interests as zealously as the eastern, doing all the good for both portions of our future family which should fall within my power.

In an August 12, 1803 letter to John C. Breckinridge Jefferson addressed the same issue, in light of the New England Federalists’ secession movement in response to his Louisiana Purchase. If there were a "separation" into two confederacies, he wrote, "God bless them both, & keep them in the union if it be for their good, but separate them, if it be better."

So on July 4 stoke up the grill, enjoy your barbecue, and drink a toast to Mr. Jefferson and his fellow secessionists. (And beware of any Straussian nonsense about how it was really Lincoln, the greatest enemy of states’ rights, including the right of secession, who taught us to "revere" the Declaration of Independence. Nothing could be further from the truth.)

July 4, 2006

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is the author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, (Three Rivers Press/Random House). His latest book is How Capitalism Saved America: The Untold Story of Our Country’s History, from the Pilgrims to the Present (Crown Forum/Random House, August 2004).

 

Thomas DiLorenzo Archives at LRC

Thomas DiLorenzo Archives at Mises.org

North American * Secession and Independence Movements

SC Republic
Republic of Texas
Hawai'i Independence
Alaska Independence Party
Second Vermont Republic
League of the South
South Carolina LOS
Christian Exodus
Free California
Bear Flag Party
Cascadia
Independent Michigan
Republic of New Hampshire
Parti Quebecois
United West Party
Separation Party of Alberta
*Puerto Rican Independence Party
Patriots for Liberty
Lakota

*Hawaii and Puerto Rico are obviously not part of North America, no offense intended

Active Secession Movements Around the World

 

Secessionist Papers Contributors
Secessionist Paper No.1
Secessionist Paper No.2
Secessionist Paper No.3
Secessionist Paper No.4
Secessionist Paper No.5
Secessionist Paper No.6
Secessionist Paper No.7
Secessionist Paper No.8
Secessionist Paper No.9

Secessionist Paper No.10

Secessionist Paper No.11
Secessionist Paper No. 12
Secessionist Paper No. 13
Secessionist Paper No. 14
Secessionist Paper No. 15
Secessionist Paper No. 16
Secessionist Paper No. 17
Secessionist Paper No. 18
Secessionist Paper No. 19
Secessionist Paper No. 20
Secessionist Paper No. 21

 

One Nation Indivisible?

One Nation Indivisible? A Study of Secession and the Constitution

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________

To the People of the various States:

AFTER an unequivocal experience of the inefficiency of the subsisting federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on a new form of government for the various united states. The subject speaks its own importance; comprehending in its consequences nothing less than the disbanding of the UNION, the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed, the fate of an empire in the making. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Copyright 2006, Fair Use Authorized