re: NPR comes to the realization that Civil War is indeed a possibility

quote:

---

Given your use of the "Uniparty" term, I suspect we are in agreement. So what have I posted to make you think I have sided, "with the forces of monetary collapse and fiscal ruin"? Where have I ever indicated I have done as you suggest?

---

By claiming that any talk of some form of political separation is sedition and that the Union is inviolable. It is an historically inaccurate myth perpetuated by the ruling bipartisan junta in Washington D.C. at the expense of the citizen’s Natural Right to “dissolve the political bands” with despotic governments.

The debasing evil of chattel slavery did not negate the right of the Southern States to secede. The North’s ultimate victory in the War Between the States likewise did not negate the inviolable right of citizens — as stated in the Declaration of Independence — to seek autarky from tyrannical governments.

“The principles of our Revolution point to the remedy — a separation.” Former Secretary of State and then Massachusetts Senator Thomas Pickering, speaking in opposition to the Louisiana Purchase, 1803.

“If any State in the Union will declare that it prefers ‘separation’ over ‘union,’ I have no hesitation in saying, ‘let us separate.’” Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

I can’t even imagine how this even works. In the War of Northern aggression, you had clear geographical lines. In this conflict, you have families that are polar opposites. Are they going to shoot at one another?

quote:

---

live in Louisiana. Louisiana is notorious for political corruption in government and ignorance in the electorate They go hand-in-hand. You can't get away with corruption with an educated electorate. Therefore, it's in the interests of those in power to maintain an ignorant electorate. The federal government is the only thing protecting me from the idiots in Baton Rouge - who are neither conservative nor liberal, simply corrupt by their own personal interests. .

---

Yeah, well welcome to my world: everything you say about corruption and ignorance in Baton Rouge can be multiplied 3x when speaking of Montgomery Alabama. Yet considering the ideals upon which this nation was founded, Washington is the epicenter of political corruption in the Universe.


The founders recognized that power corrupts. The whole idea of returning to Federalism is to decentralize and defuse political power and it’s attendant corruption.

I bet he meant to say semi auto rifles.

quote:

---

I can’t even imagine how this even works. In the War of Northern aggression, you had clear geographical lines. In this conflict, you have families that are polar opposites. Are they going to shoot at one another?

---

I’m not advocating shooting anyone: I indeed am arguing in favor of political compromises to avoid such political violence. There need not even be a formal separation of the States.

Remember how the Deepest Blue Metropolises in the Deepest Blue States announced that they were “Sanctuary Cities” and refused to help Federal officials enforce immigration law? Several Blue States simply declared that their states and cities were sanctuaries for illegal immigrants and forbid their own state and local law enforcement agencies from helping the Federal Government enforce the laws in question.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander: Red States seeking to protect, say 2nd Amendment Rights or Religious Liberty, can follow suit and copy these tactics used by Blue State progressives. Red States can simply refuse to enforce unconstitutional edicts or executive orders which violate the Natural Rights of the citizens:

Lake County, Florida becomes the first Second Amendment Sanctuary….

quote:

---

By claiming that any talk of some form of political separation is sedition and that the Union is inviolable. It is an historically inaccurate myth perpetuated by the ruling bipartisan junta in Washington D.C. at the expense of the citizen’s Natural Right to “dissolve the political bands” with despotic governments.

The debasing evil of chattel slavery did not negate the right of the Southern States to secede. The North’s ultimate victory in the War Between the States likewise did not negate the inviolable right of citizens — as stated in the Declaration of Independence — to seek autarky from tyrannical governments.

---

I understand your well reasoned position. I happen to believe the myth that the Union is in perpetuity. It seems that under those terms, we are forced to try to work this shite out. There's no taking your ball and going home. We're all in it together.

But I don't think that means I necessarily side with the forces of monetary collapse and fiscal ruin. I don't support candidates who will sign budget bills with deficits.

I think we can agree that the corporations that run the two major parties, while may be in political competition, share the same economic interests. And they divide the People to maintain their power by contriving points of contention, seemingly based on principle. This all should be expected, and indeed was predicted by Washington in his farewell address. The problem is that he People are falling for it, and abandoning the principles that should actually guide our country, like fiscal responsibility, for partisanship.

"In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts."

...

"All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests."

...

"I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally..."

...etc. I'm sure you're well aware of Washington's farewell address, and his warnings of partisanship.

I don't believe there is any actual tyranny in this country currently. To believe there is is to fall victim to the partisan-manufactured hysteria. Anyone who has lived through actual tyranny would not see what we have here as such.

quote:

---

those with the guns on the Right just have to make sure to completely eliminate every leftist piece of trash

---

How do you plan on recognizing which of your fellow Americans deserve this "complete elimination"? Do you just walk down the street and shoot hippies in the head? How, exactly, do you distinguish the leftists from the rightists?

quote:

---

The founders recognized that power corrupts. The whole idea of returning to Federalism is to decentralize and defuse political power and it’s attendant corruption.

---

Personally, I find corruption is more rooted in an ignorant populace.

After all, the founders recognized this potential problem and only enfranchised land-owning (wealthy) white, men. Those would have been less likely to be ignorant. I'm not sure going back to that would solve today's problems, however.

quote:

---

After all, the founders recognized this potential problem and only enfranchised land-owning (wealthy) white, men. Those would have been less likely to be ignorant.

---

you are on to something here

universal suffrage is a terrible idea