An appeal – secession is necessary

It is clear that the leftists are in the catbird’s seat, as we enter 2021.

The “fight” against the Pandemic is a leftist’s dream. It has no doubt advanced the timetable for the national (and world) domination they have been seeking for nigh unto 200 years.

We can call them ‘transnational’ socialists or progressives or fascists. Or as I prefer, the “Extreme Democrats” and Regressivists and the Street Mob… They want to control us, and they want US to make that possible. They are worshippers of the State, and they must convert us.

Think about those terms:

We had socialists – Marx, Bismarck, Lincoln, and the like.

We had national socialists – Mussolini and Hitler and Wilson and Franco.

We had international socialists – Lenin and Mao and Castro and their buddies.

What we have today is different: socialism in which all borders, all nationalities and ethnicities and religions are mushed into the blender. The Merkels, the Macrons, the Obamas, the Pelosis, and all their kind. In which any kind of perversion and abuse is not only tolerated but proclaimed and celebrated.

Of course, they are willing to “compromise.” For now. “We just want this,” they say, THIS election. THIS year. No, we don’t want compromise: that is one way we GOT into this mess.

We don’t want a revolution. We had one, back in 1776 – we just need the outcome of that one restored: peace, free trade, liberty, minimal government, and opportunity. No, they didn’t do that all perfectly back in the 1780s, but it was a whole lot better than the way things have decayed.

We don’t need a rebellion – or want one. We’ve had a few of those, for various reasons, from the Whiskey Rebellion to the Great Dakota Uprising and the Ghost Shirt and the Moros. And we lost a bit of liberty each time, both in having the various governments fight the rebellion and then, after the governments won, cracking down. New laws, new taxes, new demands, and punishments.

We don’t want or need a civil war. We had one of those, too, back in 1861 – it lost, and part of the revolution was rolled back. (Though it was treated as a victory for liberty.) Control OF the Federal Government is not desirable – REDUCING control BY the Federal Government is what we need.

We don’t want violence in the streets – leave that to the Democratic-politician and -bureaucrat controlled Blue States. They are the ones that want the excuse for more tyranny. In fact, not only do we NOT want violence in the streets, we want to do everything rational, reasonable, nonviolent, and voluntary to prevent it. And to stop it if it happens – again if possible in a peaceable way. But if we MUST fight to defend ourselves, our families, our homes, and our businesses and communities, we MUST fight defensively. And in a manner appropriate to the danger but no more.

Now, you say, Nathan, that’s tough.

You are right.

But we CAN do it: be as heavily armed up as we can possibly be. And keep as much control over our tempers, our enthusiasms and our natural tendency to push back, as we control our sight-picture on the firing range.

How can we do that? Separation – and if necessary, divorce. Or in political terms, secession. And NOT the way the South necessarily did that. No grandstanding in walking out of Congress by senators and representatives of the free states. No big initiatives or referendums on secession. Just slow and steady. As planned and controlled as a class for new gun owners. As steady and careful as the control over our tempers and our pistol or rifle.

And always, politely. Not in glee or anticipation, but in sadness and always offering them a chance to agree to our needs – NOT compromise, but rejection of what they offer. “No,” just as we would tell a two-year-old.

Refuse (politely) to pay their taxes: income, excise, and anything else. States collect and keep that safe – converting to Bitcoin or gold or silver. Refuse (politely) to obey their orders, whether they come from bureaucrats or judges. Refuse (politely and with regret) their money – whether it is to buy things or to subsidize things or as loans. Encourage their local people – and federal employees elsewhere who have their hometown in a separating State – to resign. (And make sure that you help them find other work to pay their bills – USEFUL work.) When your State’s senators and representatives (and their staff) and even military come home for the holidays or just to escape the horror of Biden’s DC, encourage them, persuade them, to stay.

Get your sheriffs and your towns and cities to enforce the laws equally – against federal agencies in the same way they would a private citizen or company. Encourage and help other people to file suits against them, in local courts as much as possible. Knowing that they are going to get thrown out. But always do these things in sorrowful and sympathetic understanding, with the utmost politeness and kindness.

In other words, heap burning coals and ashes on their heads. Constantly petition, again and again, the way the widow did the wicked judge in the Bible. But make it clear you have DRAWN your line – and it is NOT in the sand with a stick: it is in concrete with a jackhammer. “You’ve already gone too far – not ‘this far and no further.’ Instead, you need to back up a century or two.

If attacked, by all means, defend yourselves and others – but with a measured, pre-planned, and practiced response that is appropriate to the threat they pose.

Please share your thoughts on this subject with me and others.

About TPOL Nathan

Follower of Christ Jesus (a christian), Pahasapan (resident of the Black Hills), Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer, Evangelist. Successor to Lady Susan (Mama Liberty) at TPOL.
This entry was posted in Ideas for liberty, Nathan's Rants and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to An appeal – secession is necessary

  1. Sanford Smith says:

    Thanks Nathan! I would love the current Texas state government to “resist” all federal mandates. However, they probably do not have the courage to do so. Some of us think that the way to force the issue is to hold a Texas-wide vote. You can see more about it here:


    • TPOL Nathan says:

      Sanford, I know that the TNM is the latest and perhaps strongest to date effort to correct the sad, serious error and short-sightedness of the Founders. But don’t conditions in the major urban areas argue against the success of the TEXIT vote? Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Houston, and El Paso are hotbeds of counter-revolutionary reactionism, aren’t they? (By “counter-revolutionary” I mean opposed to the ideals and aims of the Texian Revolution.) Texans face, perhaps on a daunting scale, the same problem that lovers of liberty do in California. There, the massive support for the so-called liberals and left in the urban areas make elections problematic. These “leftists” have cozened or bought off sufficient people (or cheated in elections enough) to win elections that otherwise would be clear victories. How do you deal with that problem?


  2. feralfae says:

    Thank you Nathan. That is beautifully, elegantly, eloquently written. I appreciate having access to your words to share on Gab. I am especially delighted of spirit that you are carrying on from Susan. You are a worthy heir. Thank you. Kindest regards, Blessings, and of course ** feralfae


  3. Pingback: An appeal — secession is necessary – Rational Review News Digest

  4. Jeff Willis says:

    I call it a “peaceful separation of the states. ” Show our vision versus there’s. Our nucleus will be agricultural and energy states. Stress strict 10th amendment adherence. Proposed New England be consolidated into one state, Maryland, Delaware and Fairfax County, VA combined to form “Delmarva. ” Fast growing states Texas and Florida will split in two states each. California will become three states plus Jefferson, which includes seven Oregon counties. The biggest single difference in constitutions would be (a) 16th, 17th amendments would be absent int the new republics constitution. The 20th amendment would add a clause that would revert back to the original March 4th presidential inauguration date, in the event that an election was disputed. The constitution would also include an “English language amendment” that would likewise require photo I.D.’s and voting booth retinal scans for inclusion. The new republic would establish a “commodity dollar,” that would fully backed. I genuinely believe that most states would follow Donald Trump, if he close to lead this peaceful separation.


    • TPOL Nathan says:

      Jeff, you present a lot of bold ideas worth talking about. But what do you think of the likelihood that the establishment – even in the ag/energy states actually doing this? And are not some of these suggestions just an instinctive reaction to our current situation – and therefore likely to create other problems quickly?
      A secession SHOULD be a peaceful separation of the States – again, is that likely? An armed truce might hold initially, but more people are likely to push harder and harder until something breaks.
      Again, as with Tom and others, my apologies for delaying in posting and replying. Thanks for your comments!


  5. The center-rightists are, and for decades have been, in the “catbird seat.” The only American “left” to speak of is the radical wing of the libertarian movement.


    • TPOL Nathan says:

      I agree that the two wings of the old establishment party are in the catbird seat: and they unfortunately define the political center – always moving to the “right” as the old political spectrum defines it: more and more authoritarian.
      The opposite of that is, as you point out – and therefore “the left” – are the free-market anarchists. We are indeed the radicals.
      The “left” of which I spoke (not clearly – lazily, even) is the AntiFa/BlackLivesMatter/Extreme-Democrat sort. These want little or no true economic or personal liberties. But they are willing to tolerate a few social/personal “liberties.” Whereas their opponents (and co-conspirators) “the right” too want little or no true economic or personal liberties. But they are willing to tolerate (or pretend) a few more economic “liberties.”
      Sigh. Still trying to think of a good, simple, obviously clear term for both groups.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s