That is “succession” and not secession. TPOL wants to make it clear that we strongly support the right of secession, of declaring independence from a “sovereign power” – a state or government – when that entity no longer meets the needs of the people who want to leave it.

But this commentary is about “succession of power” – about who is next in line to enjoy the privileges and benefits of political, economic, or social power and control.

Readers of TPOL understand that we are opposed to mandatory human government – that is, virtually all human government. And therefore we would definitely not support any succession.

That is there should be no transfer of political power (which belongs to individuals, and not to a “government” or gang or mob or anyone else who uses force to carry out their will (other than in self-defense).

But human history is filled with a very sad fact of life: political and economic power often – even usually – is transferred from one wielder of power to another.

Another person additionally remarked, “God forbid that this idiot becomes our president.  She’s lucky she can remember her own name. Anybody who has the track record she has should be of concern for all.”

Yet there are millions of Democrats who have dedicated themselves to seeing that she remains a heartbeat away from being the most powerful woman in the world.

History is filled with examples of such successors, such transfer of power and those which have failed. In ancient history (a topic I’m teaching in class just after I write this), we have the pitiful example of King Solomon of Israel (about 920 BC) and his worthless successor. Rehoboam started out his reign by encouraging a revolt by 10 of the 12 tribes of ancient Israel, led by Jeroboam. Yes, that was a secession, after the succession. We see the failure of king (and queen) in nation after nation: the catastrophic war between Queen Maud (the “Empress Maude”) and King Stephen (1139-1153) after the death of Henry I particularly nasty. This civil war for 14 years devastated England and is often called “The Anarchy.”

Not all such situations necessarily result in bloodshed. At least not immediately. The secession of George H W Bush after Ronald Reagan is an American example. In the States, we have the wonderful example of Ma Ferguson replacing her husband (Pa) as Governor of Texas. We also recall the Argentine fun of Isabel Peron and much more recently Christina de Kirschner, replacing their husbands and “inheriting” the mantles of governmental power.

But the problem is not one of who comes to power, but the fact that they have power! That government has so much power that is lusted after and which various families, dynasties, clans, and tribes fight over. Take away even a large fraction of government power and many if not most problems of worthless or bizarre successors is done away with automatically.