6 Comments

What made the great Edmund Burke support the Colonial Secession of our founding fathers, and oppose King George III's military invasion for subjection...was their appeal to their rights as Englishmen. Why then not grant their grandsons the same Peaceful Secession from the Union 85 yrs later -- or support Lincoln's invasion like King George? Over 950,000 need NOT have died in an easily avoidable war.

The moral posturing, and military interventionism of the US Empire was born in 1861 -- growing yearly if not daily ever since. There is nothing inherently 'sacred' about any political union....though political divorce should likely Not be pursued for light or trivial reasons. BUT...the economic interest (greed) of the Yankee Industrial Machine could NOT $$allow$$ for an Independent South...as Charles Adams (along with many others) has made crystal clear. Simply, Peaceful Secession should bring Peaceful negotiations...not military invasions. Sadly, Lincoln like King George III, chose war...to preserve a budding US Empire that yet today continues to run wild.

https://www.amazon.com/When-Course-Human-Events-Secession/dp/0847697223/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2QN6W7LD4UPIM&keywords=when+in+the+course+of+human+events+charles+adams&qid=1705591681&sprefix=When+in+the+course+of%2Caps%2C223&sr=8-1

Expand full comment

David, if I as a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans were to pick one book to represent the true principles of the South, especially the keystone principle of secession, it would be Charles Adams' book _When in the Course of Human Events_.

Expand full comment

Note also: our Colonial forefathers did NOT seek the revolutionary overthrow of the British Govt or Empire...but only to separate from it. Likewise the Confederate Govt openly & repeatedly stated they did not seek the revolutionary overthrow of the US/Yankee Empire -- only a Peaceful political separation from it.

Expand full comment

buckle up!!!!

Expand full comment

Excellent post, Max.

Expand full comment

"[S]omething strange is happening, and we can all sense it."

"We can only speculate."

Best to begin with what is not a matter of speculation.

The rotted log that was kicked over starting in 2008 valorized a fanatical group of government dependents. Even if a voting majority now recognizes them for what they are, they are not sporting gents who will crawl back out of public view till the next "free and fair elections." They've tasted power, and they're not about to let it go. These doctrinaire nihilists confront those with a "doctrinaire" attachment to a liberty of recent memory. So, assuming that a commonsensical majority refuses to assist in its own destruction, it is inevitable that the "united" States dissolve.

From this one fact that is beyond speculation, there follows a train of inevitabilities.

Despite the commonsense majority, political forces have been kept evenly divided, thanks to the statist media. Therefore, the departure of any of the States will be like pulling one thread on a cheap sweater: The whole fabric will unravel. The departure of either California or Texas will catastrophically upset the political balance in the remainders: For half of them, continued membership will amount to political slavery. These departures should be quick in coming. Only if they are slow will a violent Federal suppression be practicable against a few secessionists. But even then, the necessary level of violence will be so shocking as to lead to a moral repudiation and a delegitimization of Federal power. Upon the resulting upheaval, the familiar law will come into force: "Civilization is only nine meals away from barbarism." And once any family sees its members in mortal jeopardy before a mob bereft of its statist support, the hitherto dainty restraints upon police power will come off. There will be no more sweet apologetics offered to the barbarians, and their race-based pleadings will be silenced under a hailstorm of swinging nightsticks. From this point we are back to speculation, when the islands of order will choose many different paths of government.

Expand full comment