Red-State Secession Redux

Posted By Spencer J. Quinn On In North American New Right | Comments Disabled
[1]

Photo courtesy Wikimedia  Commons [2]

2,090 words

The idea of a national divorce has been trending lately thanks in part to a recent tweet storm from Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (MTG). And by “national divorce,” she basically means stepping up to the line of red-state secession and not crossing it. As with most happenings in politics, all substantive change must be incremental and not instant. But because MTG’s proposal is much less incremental than usual (and because she is a sitting member of the House of Representatives), a national divorce is now a bit more conceivable than it used to be.

We need to keep beating this drum, regardless if we see red-state secession as an end in itself or merely the first step towards a viable white ethnostate. Either outcome would be an improvement to what we have today. MTG is tripling down [3], and so should we.

Her tweet from February 21st pretty much sums it up as well:

Why the left and right should consider a national divorce, not a civil war but a legal agreement to separate our ideological and political disagreements by states while maintaining our legal union. Definition of irreconcilable differences: inability to agree on most things or on important things. Tragically, I think we, the left and right, have reached irreconcilable differences. I’ll speak for the right and say, we are absolutely disgusted and fed up with the left cramming and forcing their ways on us and our children with no respect for our religion/faith, traditional values, and economic & government policy beliefs.

[6]

You can buy Spencer J. Quinn’s young adult novel The No College Club here [7].

There is a lot more on MTG’s Twitter feed which outlines the irreconcilable differences between Right and Left these days. These include red-state America’s frustrations with the $34 trillion debt, the bloated federal government, LGBTQ wokeness, lack of school prayer, Environmental Social Governance regulations, Mexican drug cartels, and police vilification. She could have said more about immigration, but she did refer to it as an “invasion” and called for ending all funding to Non-Governmental Organizations which subsidize worldwide immigration to the United States. She called out George Soros by name.

MTG also proposed something fairly revolutionary: allowing red states to restrict voting privileges for blue-state refugees, regardless of their citizenship status or criminal record. Essentially, she is fed up with the Left (as so many of us are) and recognizes the futility of trying to work with them. Why work with someone who hates you and is ideologically opposed to your very existence? Viewed from a Rightist perspective, MTG’s national divorce idea makes perfect sense.

Nevertheless, how MTG plans to accomplish her goals “while maintaining our legal union” (i.e., without secession) remains a little murky. Of course, she doesn’t want a civil war. (Who does?) At the same time, however, she seems to be promoting “home rule,” an idea expressed by F. H. Buckley in his recent book American Secession.

From my American Secession review [8]:

Home rule, as found in Quebec, will allow different regions of the United States to be able to choose which aspects of federal control they can nullify. Thus, we will see vastly different ways of life in different parts of the country: gun rights and traditional marriage here, abortion rights and gay marriage there. Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson statues here, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X statues there. You see the point. Further, with access to U-Hauls (a common theme in American Secession), people will eventually sort themselves out, and a more variegated and sectionalized nation will find peace in the long run. Vive le différence!

With MTG being a sitting member of Congress, we have to filter some of what she says. She simply cannot call for outright secession, red-state or otherwise. Such a call would be tantamount to treason against the country she was elected to serve. She also doesn’t seem to realize that it wouldn’t be worth going through the motions of a divorce without ultimately moving out of the house. It is possible, however, she privately wants red-state secession and, to that end, is putting verbiage out there that will get millions excited about the idea, or at least used to it.

Tim Pool seems to get it:

America Is IMPLODING & A National Divorce Is Inevitable As Culture War Escalates To Civil WarAmerica Is IMPLODING & A National Divorce Is Inevitable As Culture War Escalates To Civil War

 

An organization also getting it is Red-State Secession [9]. (See their substack here [10].) I wrote an essay about Red-State Secession [11] in October 2021 in which I highlighted my ISEE Model of White Survival, which demonstrates what red-state secession and White Nationalism have in common, as well as their one main difference.

[12]

Since October 2021, Red-State Secession has been busy providing poll results and analysis which point to how “the Right will avoid eternal rule by the Left on this continent,” as they say on their About Us [13] page. Here are a few examples.

In one poll, 41% of Biden voters and 52% of Trump voters [14] at least somewhat agreed that we should split the country. This poll, from The Center For Politics [15], was conducted in the summer of 2021 and reports further that 18% of Biden voters and 25% of Trump voters strongly supported this measure. The poll also reveals exactly how partisan America has become on both sides of the political aisle. In response to the prompt, “I have come to view elected officials from the opposite party as presenting a clear and present danger to American democracy,” clear majorities on both sides strongly agreed, and over 80% on each side at least somewhat agreed.

That there is what we call a slam dunk.

Red-State Secession also notes that this poll strongly suggests a desire to turn to what’s known as “Caesarism” to solve our problems. They define Caesarism as the desire for “a strong man who acts as a dictator on behalf of the people to replace a government who no longer serve the people.” The prompt, “Our country needs a powerful leader in order to destroy the radical and immoral currents prevailing in society today” elicited either strong or lukewarm support from 62% of Biden voters and a whopping 82%of Trump voters.

Below are the poll’s full results as presented by Red-State Secession:

[16]

[17]

Another poll, conducted in July 2022 by SurveyUSA, confirmed that 66% of voters in Texas wished to secede [18]. This constitutes 73% of Republican voters and 59% of Democrat voters. The poll posed the same questions to voters in six other states, and while the results were not as dramatic, Republican voters calling for secession were in the slim majority of Republicans in four of them (Louisiana, Alabama, Flordia, and South Carolina). Note especially the high numbers coming from Louisiana, which also seems to be secession minded [19]. In all cases except those of Idaho and Texas, the total “yes” vote hovered between a healthy 44 and 47%:

[20]

The poll also asked voters in these states whether they would want military intervention in the event that either California, Texas, or Hawaii were to secede. The resulting percentages were encouragingly low:

[21]

We can find the survey results on SurveyUSA’s website for Hawaii [22], Texas [23], Louisiana [24], Mississippi [25], Alabama [26], Florida [27], and South Carolina [28]. The site also includes results for New Hampshire [29].

Red-State Secession continues its analysis of Texas independence, or Texit, here [30]. They also recommend the Texas Nationalist Movement site [31], as well as the book TEXIT: How and Why Texas Will Leave the Union [32] by Daniel Miller [33].

Red-State Secession further highlights state efforts to secede from other states. Illinois voters recently proved very open-minded [34] when it came to splitting the Prairie State in two:

Voters approved referendums on the topic in Brown County by 77%, Hardin County by 76%, and two townships in Madison County (Lee 75% and New Douglas 68% [35]).

This brings the total number of counties in southern and central Illinois to approve the measure to 27 [36], according to a map [37] released by organizers today. No counties have rejected the measure. The referendums are non-binding.

The referendums ask voters “Shall the board of your county correspond with the boards of the other counties of Illinois outside of Cook County about the possibility of separating from Cook County to form a new state, and to seek admission to the Union as such, subject to the approval of the people?”

[38]

Red-State Secession provides additional steps for those looking to help Illinois secede here [39].

Secession fever seems to catching on in a lot of places these days. In October 2021, five Maryland state legislators, including a state Senator, intreated West Virginia to annex three Maryland counties [40]. Although they would be moving into a poorer state, the people of these counties seem more interested in preserving their traditional and rural way of life than in receiving fat checks from the government. Also, as Red-State Secession points out:

Moving the Maryland / West Virginia border to add these counties to West Virginia would increase the average income of EACH state by more than 1%. This is simply because the three counties have a lower income than Maryland (so leaving makes Maryland richer), but a higher income than WV (so joining makes WV richer).

The three counties in question are Garrett, Allegany, and Washington. One glance at a map will reveal how much sense this proposition makes:

[41]

Combine all of this with the current movement in eastern Oregon to secede and join Idaho [42], and the fact that the State of New California recently sent two delegates to Washington, DC [43], and one begins to realize that Red-State Secession may be on to something after all.

But Red-State Secession does not merely report on whatever secessionist movement is gaining steam. It also offers a theoretical underpinning [44] for secession itself. Guest writer Scott Winston Dragland puts it well:

The federal government cannot be reformed. It cannot be restored to its constitutional boundaries. Attempts to do so are doomed to failure. The idea that the federal government can be redeemed is a well-intentioned delusion. If anyone could do it, President Trump was the man to do it — but the deep state resisted him every step of the way, and he was ousted from the Oval Office via a rigged election. Conservative states have a choice: subservience and submission to a corrupt federal regime, or peaceful, lawful secession.

Dragland argues that secession was baked in the cake of the Declaration of Independence — which, of course, triggered its own secessionist movement from the British Empire. The document asserts that “When a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce [mankind] under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for their future Security.” Ergo, throwing Washington off in 2023 to provide “new guards” for security finds its blessing in the Declaration of Independence.

In the 39th Federalist Paper, James Madison writes that in forming the Union, each state was “considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act.” According to Dragland, if “sovereign” and “independent” states voluntarily joined together, then they can voluntarily split apart as well. Dragland also points out that according to the Tenth Amendment, the states retain the right to determine the legality of secession, since the US Constitution does not explicitly ban it. Most pointedly, Dragland dismisses the idea that the Civil War settled anything. “The Civil War did not settle the issue of secession,” he writes. “Military conquest cannot settle an issue of constitutional law any more than a sledgehammer can write a book.”

It’s interesting how Dragland equates the Union victory in the Civil War with military conquest. Today, the Leftist-controlled United States government wants the very same thing. This is why they would never approve of red-state secession in any of its forms as long as Democrats and their globalist donors have control over Washington. Thus, the legality of secession doesn’t really matter if the Right does not have the guns and manpower to back it up. By the same token, however, the legality of our current union also doesn’t really matter if the Left also lacks guns and manpower to back it up. In the end, it all boils down to what the people want. What are they willing to vote and rally for? And what are they willing to fight for?

Red-State Secession is all about exhausting the first two options before we have no choice but to resort to the third. We should all hope they succeed — and secede.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:

Paywall Gift Subscriptions

[46]If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:

To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.