It's time to part company

Walter E. Williams

One political question we have to answer is whether George W. Bush or Albert Gore shall be president, and just which party will control the House of Representatives and the Senate. But I'd suggest that there's a far more important long-run question we must answer: If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives, and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, and risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences, or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?

Like a marriage that has gone bad, I believe there are enough irreconcilable differences between those who want to control and those want to be left alone that divorce is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.

Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

Nowhere among the enumerated powers of Congress is there authority to tax and spend for: Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps and other activities that represent roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for Congress' mandates to the states and people about how they may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. A list of congressional violations of the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end.

Americans who wish to live free have two options: We can resist, fight and risk bloodshed to force America's tyrants to respect our liberties and human rights, or we can seek a peaceful resolution of our irreconcilable differences by separating. That can be done by peopling several states, say Texas and Louisiana, controlling their legislatures and then issuing a unilateral declaration of independence just as the Founders did in 1776.

You say, "Williams, nobody has to go that far, just get involved in the political process and vote for the right person." That's nonsense. Liberty shouldn't require a vote. It's a God-given or natural right.

Some independence or secessionists movements, such as our 1776 war with England and our 1861 War Between the States, have been violent, but they need not be. In 1905, Norway seceded from Sweden, Panama seceded from Columbia (1903), and West Virginia from Virginia (1863). Nonetheless, violent secession can lead to great friendships. England is probably our greatest ally and we have fought three major wars together. There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally and have strong economic ties with United States.

The bottom line question for all of us is should we part company or continue trying to forcibly impose our wills on one another?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 20, 2000

Answers

Looks like treason season has started.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), September 20, 2000.

Just what *I* need...a civil war on my front lawn. Let this guy pick on Florida, eh?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), September 20, 2000.

I can't believe this dipshit pointed to W. Virginia splitting from Virginia as a sign of peaceful "secession". What a moron!

No offense, Unk.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), September 20, 2000.

I'm guessing that the writer chose Texas and Louisiana as random examples, but it's interesting that he chose states with already well-established, relatively large populations to inhabit. I would think that this idea would be more successful if less populous states were "peopled," say Montana or Alaska. Of course, then they wouldn't have the benefit of a large amount of business and industry in their "country" as they would with "Texiana." But that shouldn't matter, because they would be left alone, right?

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 20, 2000.

Secessionists need a coastline...

-- helen (b@s.w), September 20, 2000.

I can't believe this dipshit pointed to W. Virginia splitting from Virginia as a sign of peaceful "secession". What a moron!

Wasn't that peaceful to the folks who were there. Montana could leave, but that would just create another third world country. Most of the "fruitloops" choose Washington. Their only problem is that the majority of folks in Washington don't agree with them. Hence, they whine alot.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 20, 2000.

I found the "labels" quite interesting:

"...one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives..."

VERSUS

"...[one group of people] prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone..."

Couple that with the ever-popular "...Americans who wish to live free have two options...". And "the others" don't "wish to live free"?

Who decided the two had to be mutually exclusive; an "either/or" proposition? Reminds me of that piece you posted, Anita, "They Call Me A Liberal".

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), September 20, 2000.

I'm racking my brain but cannot remember when North and South Carolina seceeded from Carolina.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), September 20, 2000.

The separation of West Virginia from Virginia was peaceful?

Go to WV Civil War Site

Well, this just may be more disinformation. Maybe the folks all met in Wheeling and decided not to have battles. Or maybe not. Seems that the history has been revised by Unc's article.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 20, 2000.

Panama and Colombia; Peaceful?

Panama

Maybe more misinformation. Read it and decide. Maybe this person that Unc posted doesn't know what he is talking about. I could go on, but I must get ready to leave.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 20, 2000.

Entered into public discussion, I like it so far.

So, I wonder, will all of the folks who feel this way end up like Tim McVey? Or is another solution out there?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 20, 2000.

"If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives, and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone,"

This is hogwash. The Republicans, who favor outlawing abortion, are just as hell bent on controlling our lives as the Democrats.

-- yeah right (@ .), September 21, 2000.

yeah right, you are not able to think outside the lines are you?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 21, 2000.

Having just posted this article about releasing oil from the strategic oil reserves, I found it interesting to learn that the stockpile is located in two states:

Texas and Louisiana.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 21, 2000.

There's a county in Wyoming that went to court to enforce the rule that federal law enforcement officials may not enter the county and proceed with the stuff they do unless and until they have informed the county sheriff of their desires and gotten his/her permission.

There's a place to start. Find a underpopulated county, move in people who prefer to be left alone, and change the existing laws to suit. Then spread to the next county and then the next.

Look Unk, I didn't even mention Democrats or Republicans!

-- helen (b@s.x), September 21, 2000.