Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- When You're Cutting Social Security, 'Wealthy' Begins at $25K
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
The New Secessionists
These groups at least grasp that the old divisions between liberals and conservatives are obsolete and meaningless. They understand that corporations have carried out a coup d’état. They recognize that our permanent war economy and costly and futile imperial wars are unsustainable and they demand that we take popular action to prevent citizens from being further impoverished and robbed by Wall Street speculators and corporations.
“The defining characteristic of the Second Vermont Republic is that there are two enemies, the United States government and corporate America,” Thomas Naylor, who founded Vermont’s secessionist movement, told me when I reached him by phone at his home 10 miles south of Burlington. “One owns the other one. We are not like the tea party. The underlying premise of the tea party movement is that the system is fixable.”
Naylor rattles off the stark indicators of the nation’s decline, noting that the United States stands near the bottom among industrialized countries in voter turnout, last in health care, last in education and highest in homicide rates, mortality, STDs among juveniles, youth pregnancy, abortion and divorce. The nation, he notes grimly, has trillions in deficits it can never repay, is beset by staggering income disparities, has destroyed its manufacturing base and is the planet’s most egregious polluter and greediest consumer of fossil fuels. With some 40 million Americans living in poverty, tens of millions more in a category called “near poverty” and a permanent underclass trapped by a real unemployment rate of 17 percent, there is ample tinder for internal combustion. If we do not undertake a dramatic reversal soon, he asserts, the country and the global environment will implode with catastrophic consequences.
The secessionist movement is gaining ground in several states, especially Texas, where elected officials increasingly have to contend with secessionist sentiments.
“Our membership has grown tremendously since the bailouts, since the tail end of the Bush administration,” said Daniel Miller, the leader of the Texas Nationalist Movement, when I spoke with him by telephone from his home in the small town of Nederland, Texas. “There is a feeling in Texas that we are being spent into oblivion. We are operating as the cash cow for the states that cannot manage their budgets. With this Congress, Texas has been squarely in their cross hairs, from cap and trade to the alien transfer and exit program. So many legislative pieces coming down the pike are offensive to people here in Texas. The sentiment for independence here is very high. The sentiment inside the Legislature and state capital is one of guarded optimism. There are scores of folks within state government who are supportive of what we are doing, although there is a need to see the public support in a more tangible way. This is why we launched our Let Texas Decide petition drive. We intend to deliver over a million signatures on the opening day of the [state legislative] session on Jan. 11, 2011.”
Miller, like Naylor, expects many in the tea party to migrate to secessionist movements once they realize that they cannot alter the structure or power of the corporate state through electoral politics. Polls in Texas show the secessionists have support from about 35 percent of the state’s population, and Vermont is not far behind.
Naylor, who taught economics at Duke University for 30 years, is, along with Kirkpatrick Sale and Donald Livingston, one of the intellectual godfathers of the secessionist movement. His writing can be found on The Second Vermont Republic website, on the website Secession News and in postings on the Middlebury Institute website. Naylor first proposed secession in his 1997 book “Downsizing the USA.” He comes out of the “small is beautiful” movement, as does Sale. Naylor lives with his wife in the Vermont village of Charlotte.
The Second Vermont Republic arose from the statewide anti-war protests in 2003. It embraces a left-wing populism that makes it unique among the national movements, which usually veer more toward Ron Paul libertarianism. The Vermont movement, like the Texas and Alaska movements, is well organized. It has a bimonthly newspaper called The Vermont Commons, which champions sustainable agriculture and energy supplies based on wind and water, and calls for locally owned banks which will open lines of credit to their communities. Dennis Steele, who is campaigning for governor as a secessionist, runs Radio Free Vermont, which gives a venue to Vermont musicians and groups as well as being a voice of the movement. Vermont, like Texas, was an independent republic, but on March 4, 1791, voted to enter the union. Supporters of the Second Vermont Republic commemorate the anniversary by holding a mock funeral procession through the state capital, Montpelier, with a casket marked “Vermont.” Secessionist candidates in Vermont are currently running for governor, lieutenant governor, eight Senate seats and two House seats.
“The movement, at its core, is anti-authoritarian,” said Sale, who works closely with Naylor and spoke with me from his home in Charleston, S.C. “It includes those who are libertarians and those who are on the anarchic community side. In traditional terms these people are left and right, but they have come very close together in their anti-authoritarianism. Left and right no longer have meaning.”
The movement correctly views the corporate state as a force that has so corrupted the economy, as well as the electoral and judicial process, that it cannot be defeated through traditional routes. It also knows that the corporate state, which looks at the natural world and human beings as commodities to be exploited until exhaustion or collapse occurs, is rapidly cannibalizing the nation and pushing the planet toward irrevocable crisis. And it argues that the corporate state can be dismantled only through radical forms of nonviolent revolt and the dissolution of the United States. As an act of revolt it has many attributes.
“The only way we will ever stop these wars is when we stop paying for them,” Naylor told me. “Vermont contributes about $1.5 billion to the Pentagon’s budget. Do we want to keep supporting these wars? If not, let’s pull out. We have two objectives. The first is returning Vermont to its status as an independent republic. The second is the peaceful dissolution of the empire. I see these as being mutually complementary.”
“The U.S. government has lost its moral authority,” he went on. “It is corrupt to the core. It is owned, operated and controlled by Wall Street and corporate America. Its foreign policy is controlled by the Israeli lobby. It is unsustainable economically, socially, morally, militarily and environmentally. It is ungovernable and therefore unfixable. The question is, do you go down with the Titanic or do you seek other options?”
The leaders of the movement concede that sentiment still outstrips organization. There has not been a large proliferation of new groups, and a few old groups have folded because of a lack of leadership and support. But they insist that an increasing number of Americans are receptive to their ideas.
“The number of groups has not grown as I hoped it would when I started having congresses,” said Sale, who addresses groups around the country. “But the number of people, of individuals, of websites and the number of libertarians who have come around has grown leaps and bounds. Many of those who were disappointed by the treatment of Ron Paul have come to the conclusion that they cannot have a Libertarian Party or a libertarian Republican. They are beginning to talk about secession.”
“Secessionists have to be very careful not to be militaristic,” Sale warned. “This cannot be won by the gun. You can be emphatic in your secessionism, but it won’t happen by carrying guns. I don’t know what the tea party people think they are going to accomplish with guns. I guess it is a statement against the federal government and the fear that Obama is about to have gun control. It appears to be an assertion of individual rights. But the tea party people have not yet understood how they are going to get their view across. They still believe they can elect people, either Republicans or declared conservatives, to office in Washington and have an effect, as if you can escape the culture of Washington and the characteristics of government that has only gotten bigger and will only continue to get bigger. Electing people to the House and Senate is not going to change the characteristics of the system.”
The most pressing problem is that the movement harbors within its ranks Southern secessionists who wrap themselves in the Confederate flag, begin their meetings singing Dixie and celebrate the slave culture of the antebellum South. Secessionist groups such as the Southern National Congress and the more radical League of the South, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled a “racist hate group,” openly embrace a return to uncontested white, male power. And this aspect of the movement deeply disturbs leaders such as Naylor, Sale and Miller.
What all these movements grasp, however, is that the American empire is over. It cannot be sustained. They understand that we must disengage peacefully, learn to speak with a new humility and live with a new simplicity, or see an economic collapse that could trigger a perverted Christian fascism, a ruthless police state and internecine violence.
“There are three or four possible scenarios that will bring down the empire,” Naylor said. “One possibility is a war with Iran. Another will see the Chinese pull the plug on Treasury bills. Even if these do not happen, the infrastructure of the country is decaying. This is a slower process. And they do not have the economy fixed. It is smoke and mirrors. This is why the price of gold is so high. The economy and the inability to stop the wars will alone be enough to bring us down. There is no escape now from our imperial overstretch.”
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



167 Comments so far
Show AllRE: The Soviet empire went down and what happened?
What I meant by this was that I don't see the "collapse" happening like a Micheal Rupert scenario. The collapse of the Soviet Union was greatly assisted by the US. I would be very happy to see the US empire crumble but I don't see it playing out like the USSR. I wouldn't be surprised if the US MIC became more of a supra-national military force, tied more to the needs of transnational corporations than the US as a nation state. In other words, the state of the US economy may not matter that much to elite power (and the empire). The standard of living will drop drastically for most Americans. We will become like a 3rd world country: majority poor, a much smaller middle class and a tiny super-rich elite.
I can say one bad thing about the collapse of the USSR: the existence the Soviet Union put a check on US aggression. I would argue that the world today is MORE not less dangerous with only one superpower. Your last sentence is puzzling; I don't understand what you are trying to get at.
In turn, our collapse is being greatly assisted by the Chinese and sources of wage slave labor throughout Asia and the third world. What of it? As for the MIC, they are already being privatized and taking on the specter of a transnational corporate force. It is an entirely different issue than the one of Americans turning their backs on supporting and funding it. The elite power has already turned their backs on the working class. Where have you been the last 30 years? Our manufacturing base has been destroyed, millions of jobs shipped overseas. To what degree we become third world depends on whether or not things like secession become a reality. Our business and political leaders have failed us greatly. If we allow this to continue, we will slide into the abyss.
USSR or not, the MIC is in the business of threat. No surprise that PNAC mysteriously predicted 9/11 well in advance. The point is, if no enemy exists, one will be created. It is the nature of the beast.
As for baby bottles, it is human nature to shun change and yearn for security. Unfortunately, the security that was offered by our society is crumbling under our feet. In spite of this fact, you see many on this board cling to it, much like a baby cries for its bottle when being weaned.
You are not telling me anything I don't already know.
"As for baby bottles..." This is a straw man here. I don't agree with the notion of "human nature". Who gets to decide what is, and is not human nature? And who benefits from that conception? The powerful, usually it is religion. Christians tell us that human nature is is born in sin, and can only be saved by following them. Capitalists tell us that we are all greedy, it is unfortunate, but nothing can be done about capitalist excess for it is "human Nature". I don't buy it.
Human "nature" is determined by the conditions of human material existence. Maybe we should agree to disagree as this is an ancient philosophical battle that continues to the present: Idealism vs Materialism (Plato vs Epicurus, Capitalism vs Marxism ).
Dafoe
I support the Vermont secessionists in their very well organized efforts to bring about the 2nd republic of Vermont, through non violent means. When they succeed in issuing their articles of secession, the federal guvmint will be caught between two courses of action, to bow to them or send in the armed forces . If they send in the armed forces one expects that more Vermonters will have their backbones reinforced along with their determination that secession was the right move.
I like the Vermont movement.
change must come quickly, as time is ever shorter...
we must concurrently concentrate on climate, chemicals and crackdown...
all of these have common threads: private property, and perpetuity...
there comes a time when each generation must question the very conditions and philosophies handed to them upon arrival...
the revolving aspect of human generational existence, the overlapping of individual emotional and intellectual lifespans, and the nature of tradition, education and socialization encourage an individual, or a society, to go through an entire lifetime, or several, without ever asking such questions...
or reacting to the answers...
Global Start Date: September 22, 2012, if that's not too late...unanimous, planetwide rejection of the modern world...cessation of industry, electricity and private property...erasure of economic obligation...local living, acoustic and agrarian...
Get those drones ready in case these secessionist movements go too far! I read that Sarah Palin and her husband use to support and belonged to the Alaska secessionist movement, so if she is elected in 2012 and some of these States like Vermont gain traction, that could be very interesting.
Palin elected in 2012? Not even SHE wants that. Otherwise great post!
Through out all of History there has always been a dynamic between centralization of power and decentralization.
At one far end of the spectrum we have tribalism based on clans and families as the "political Unit" and at the other we have Global Government wherein true Political power is held by a handful over the many.
Global Governance leads to non localization of economies and I think most of us here recognize the dangers inherent in that. Tribalism and Governance via family and clans leads us to the Chaos we see in the Somalias of the World.
Sweden and Norway and Finland are all small countries that are peaceful and prosperous. SIZE is not a requirement for such. Much larger Countries can also be prosperous and peaceful.
We can not use as example Yugoslavia breaking into smaller entities as PROOF secession leads to more conflict and poverty any more then we can point to the example of Greece and the EU as an example as to why joining a larger entity where policy dictated out of Brussels proves larger nation states are harmful.
We need BALANCE. A nation state formed around the West Coast States in the USA can be very prosperous, as a vermont can be.
They can also be failures. It a matter of POLICIES that are set rather then size.
At last - someone mentioned all important "balance"!
Unless each new seceded "little country" had balance in its politics the same old problems would soon arise. The way it looks now, there would be no balance. Southern states who would be new countries would lean right, with policies to match. Northern states likewise to the left. Those living in these new countries are no more likely to be 100% in favour of the policies than the population of the existing USA is.
There would be several smaller versions of what we have now. Would that be any better?
Then there'd be the problem and splits in communication, roads, boundaries etc. etc. etc.
I think it's just a pipe dream.
Hedges' effort to conflate the right-wing Texas succession effort with the left-wing Vermonter movement is laughable. Texas is pro-corporate, pro- military, authoritarian, anti-entitlement and anti-tax. And the Vermonter movement is just the opposite.
The point is about the possibility of democracy on a manageable scale. Also Texas is already the most dangerous state in recent history for the reasons you mention. I think their danger would be reduced in isolation. Of course I am from Vermont, and all for secession.
I am surprised at all the negative response. If we were building a viable national left I could understand such negative feelings about secession. But this makes sense, it would offer escape from the ruts of militarism and corporatism that have devoured the possibility of self government. Suddenly the news would matter because you would be making it, ideas would matter, moral issues, local economies, local products, indeed citizens would matter.
This is no easy panacea but I suggest readers think about it deeply, as though it were possible and see if it is not incredibly bracing. An intelligent step as the empire implodes.
Thanks jonabark. I guess I missed the point, but when you put it the way you do it crystalizes nicely. "The ruts of militarism and corporatism" are indeed good reasons to disband this dysfunctional union. I just don't understand why Hedges seems to think that left and right don't apply anymore. The reason behind secession seems crucial to the resulting entity.
cygnus-x1 gave us a link to an energy resource report of recent orgin. Exxon-mobile gave their stock holders the first of such reports back in Feb 2004 (http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/15485/A_Report_On_Energy_Trends_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_and_Alternative_Energy.html). At the time I sent the link to all major newspapers and to all of my representatives. I got no serious responses. I do think that Arnold Schartznegger took it seriously, even though I got no reply. Go electric!
The world’s dwindling oil supplies has been well known for several decades. The first major report from an energy supplier came in ExxonMobil’s annual report in Feb 2004. http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/15485/A_Report_On_Energy_Trends_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_and_Alternative_Energy.html
It was widely distributed at that time, but received almost no media attention. Arnold Schwarzenegger is one of the few leaders who took some action to help protect California citizens, although he has had horrible opposition. We have to help ourselves folks, unfortunately, we are afraid of the truth.
The sooner we run out of oil the sooner we stop
destroying the environment. Give up your
excessive wealth and come join our parade.
Since Native Americans were forced into US citizenship in order to abrogate the shreds of the treaties that the US and sovereign native groups supposedly signed:
All lands which the US does not have clear title to, even with forged native leaders' signatures--about 40 percent of what is called the US--should immediately be withdrawn from US government control, as well as bogus state control.
Then maybe the rest of this secessionist agitation would simply be moot.
Fee fi fo fum, I smell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y. Face it. I see you're still typing from Mexico where natives where also kicked out. You can't single out the US and must include all of North and South America in your defense of Native Americans. Go back and study history of the Americas in full. Oh, and nice try on getting a new account.
I see no hypocrisy in the original post. Just because they didn't mention the remnants of Spanish imperialism doesn't negate or contradict US imperialism. The US has been a white majority country. Most of the population of Latin America are brown people, with a ruling class descended from white Spanish invaders. Unlike Spanish imperialism US imperialism was a settler form of colonialism like Zionism in Israel. Go back and study history? OK, but whose history?
And, what difference does it make even if the poster is "typing from Mexico"?
Tom, I was replying to that banned user but I do apologize for getting a little off. Now, onto history. I don't know how they teach basic history of the Americas but here's some basic information on Francisco Pizarro and Hernando Cortes:
http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw13cortezpizarro31011403.htm
If it weren't for those two, the natives in those lands wouldn't have been in disarray. Let's also not forget that it was Spain who did most of the empire building and colonization of the Americas with England competing for the USA and France competing for some of Canada:
http://www.sais-jhu.edu/bin/u/w/history1.pdf
That's what I'm trying to get at but that original poster always uses that offensive word "gringo" and gets in trouble for it. True, the USA remains a lost soul of a nation while Latin America has been continuing to work towards breaking free from that status but we still cannot limit bloodshed against the Native Americans to the USA alone.
Max: It's time for you to take a laxative.
You are way too full of it, again.
readreadweepweep, reading a thorough history of the Americas beats taking a lousy laxative.
Really?
You'd better get going on that reading then.
In the original post the word "gringo" does not appear. This makes it look like you've got an axe to grind with the poster. It doesn't help your argument.
As to history, the "hyperhistory" website is history from a "Biblical perspective" (from the homepage). So your source history of the Conquistadors is a perspective from the Conquistador religion? Your other source looks like a freshman level history class.
For history I would recommend Eduardo Galeano's "The Open Veins of Latin America."
Galeano's book is damned definitive, all right.
As to the poster spewing drivel under the name Max Payne, he is an internet site stalker.
I suppose he chose me hoping that he will get points for stalking an Indian....
All this discussion brings to mind the old Peter Sellers movie "The Mouse That Roared" about a tiny nation that declared war on the US and immediately capitulated, all with the notion that after it "lost" the war it could receive foreign aid. Perhaps the Vermonters are truly on to something.
Of course, the US is so far in debt that it cannot afford to pay foreign aid to anybody, much less give aid to its own citizens. This little obstacle could throw a wrench into the Vermonters' plans. :-)
Say what? Iraq and Afghanistan anyone? No debt is too large for empire building.
GW North:
“Sweden and Norway and Finland are all small countries
that are peaceful and prosperous. SIZE is not a requirement
for such. Much larger Countries can also be prosperous and
peaceful.”
Your three nations are among the most intelligent and have
the smallest laboring class. For only 10% of their society
is without a high school diploma.
Whereas, the U.S. has the most intelligent ruling class on
earth as evidenced by our superior military and economy,
which causes a great disparity of wealth and laboring class
slavery. For of all the industrialized nations, only we have
49% of our population a laboring class people without the
ability to achieve a high school diploma.
An intelligence dictatorship actually.
Isn't this the question Lincoln answered with the Civil War? If we all get to vote, can we vote ourselves out of the democracy? Answer: no. Hedges is right, secession is peaceful, prevention of secession involves violence. But I would submit that the violence of secession is just less obvious. It does violence to large political entities, with large dreams, histories, and outcomes. A collection of small political entities may be better (think Europe), or may not. I don't think it is automatically less violent.
While we slept, our government was taken away from us. We need to take it back, ala fixcongressfirst.org, and other measures to remove money from power, to break up our political economy back into 'political' and 'economy'. Preserving the union by cutting off the moneyed forces may involve a certain amount of violence (but by violence I mean mass-action, not hurtful). But, as Lincoln showed, preserving the Union always required some violence. If we are passive about it, the moneyed-forces of the world will complete their takeover, and we'll be unwanted strangers in our own land.
I guess what I mean by violence is illustrated in a recent Krugman op-ed. The President had said that finance reform may be good not just for the nation, but for WallStreet. Krugman's response was that if WallStreet doesn't feel pain, you aren't doing it right. I concur. These moneyed forces that have attempted to co-opt 'our' government need to be placed in pain. This is what I mean by violence. This pain must come in three ways:
1. They must be shut out from governance (campaign finance reform), so completely and utterly that they have no access that ordinary Americans don't also have.
2. They must be re-regulated with empowered government agencies tasked with policing them and their actions. OUR representatives must act, through OUR regulatory agencies, to remind them at whose leisure they are allowed to operate: OURS.
3. They must be broken up into smaller economic entities. I'm a big fan of anti-trust, even more than of unions, as a way of rebalancing the labor-to-management ratio. Create 10 management structures where 1 existed previously, and you just elevated the power of labor by 10 times. If we're going to keep this union-busting environment Reagan started us into, then we're going to have to do a better job of management-busting. (Note, anti-trust makes no difference to stock and bond holders, and may, through greater management competition, actually increase their returns or lower their risks).
So, we really do have to do violence to the moneyed-powers that have co-opted our government, to regain our Union. The violence we do is to protest in mass-action until legislation is passed that places them in pain. We should not shirk from the fact that they will be in pain, and that our violence is what places them there. This pain is necessary to preserve the Union.
I would submit that the legal question regarding secession was NOT solved by the Civil War. The consensus among legalists in 1860 was the states had every right to secede, the only real question being compensation for federal property **constructed** on state real property. This was the fundamental question at issue regarding Fort Sumter in Charlestown harbor; and if an idiot Fire-eater hadn't put his cigar to the fuse of a cannon and started what would become the Civil War, it's very possible that separation would have been possible. BUT such separation was anethema to The Money Power in the North, and one can see why by looking at a map of the USA and note who would then control the rivers, which at the time were the Empire's commercial arteries. As was said then, the several states formed the national government, so it is possible for the several states to undo it or sever their ties to it.
That is interesting. I can see why the Money Power wanted to stop it, for reasons of geography as you put it.
We in the first world are all benefactors at least in the financial sense from the predator nature of colonialism and empire building.
It is natural for families to try to maintain the advantages that they already have through property or Wall St holdings some of which back up pension plans profiting from these same unethical practices. Of course many 401Ks and pension plans were bilked, though many remain profitable with holdings in the likes of Ratheon, GE, and Boeing that rely on the MIC. The recipients of these pensions have limited input in these plans management giving more inertia to the permanent war economy.
Perhaps the Wall St. versus Main St. is a false dichotomy.
The maze of influential actors on the world stage are mostly acting like they are players an improvised farce whose endgame is even more disheartening then the latest ‘Survivor’ series.
“When you see an old lady run, no ask run too.” Jamaican saying
If Vermont secedes -- I'm moving there - assuming they'll let me in.
Quebec in Canada wants to in effect secede -- I have always said that if they break away, that's where I want to move to.
At this point, where does a refugee from the North American (Canada/USA) Corporatocracy run to?
Quebec will never do that - they take a very large share of federal dollars.
Nova Scotia gets my vote.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
If Vermont goes, Maine and NH are following it. And then Quebec would finish what they started 20 years ago. Anybody who has visited Quebec City must surely have seen the sign that greets you at the city limits: "Welcome to our Nation's Capital." They already see themselves as removed from Canada. The natural realignment out of all of this would be a new confederation of Maine, NH, Vt and the North Atlantic provinces of Canada. Remember, the Maine legislature very nearly moved the state into the Nova Scotia time zone in '04--where Maine actually falls, anyway, according to strict geographic zoning.
Sounds good, Briggs, those states and provinces big enough, beautiful enough, friendly enough, and empathetic enough for me.
Best,
Alan
I like Chris Hedges' work, but he seems to have a need to write a sensationalist article every week. Does anyone really think that those who wield real power in this country are concerned about the secessionist movement? The only way I see that a movement to secede could be successful would be that 20 or 30 states would have to be involved. The movement in Vermont is wonderful, but it is a lonely aberration. In other words, this article is way too premature. It's hyperbole and for me it hurts Hedges' credibility.
Only a few months ago I'd have said same thing, that Hedges is being overwrought.
However, seeing increasing intransigence on the far Right, and hearing the tones of violence in the rhetoric of individuals prominent as Boehner & Palin, I'm not sure it's so much of a stretch.
The crazy Right is dug in & entrenched. They're not backing down, their positions are setting further to the extreme. They have the sympathies of the largest mobilized force in the grassroots now, the Tea-partiers movement. With part of America seriously discussing the issue of shooting at the other part, I don't see a way around, someday, some sort of partition.
Keep in mind that we only hear of the"crazy Right" when a Democrat is in the White House. In my view the hyperventilation of the Right is designed to act as an excuse to limit the Democratic Party's ability to fulfill any of its "promises" to those that got them elected. This is not a defense of the Democrats, rather I see the behavior of "crazy Right" and their corporate mouthpieces of the Right Wing Echo Chamber (with tacit help from the "Liberal" press) as a strategy coordinated by our corporate (ruling) class who controls both parties.
You have nailed it, in my opinion. Chomsky calls it manufacturing.
The more rabid the Rs, the more moderate the Ds appear. It's an age old trick ... and it still works beautifully!
RE: Chomsky calls it manufacturing [consent]
"Manufacturing Consent" is a foundational book in explaining the American propaganda and doctrinal system. You'll notice that when Chomsky talks about propaganda he doesn't talk about Fox News ("that's too easy" quoting Chomsky), he talks about the New York Times. It is a must read!!!
I'd like to see all these secesh trying to make up the shortfall in veterans' and retirees' benefits out of their own pockets.
Just where do you think those monies come from, trees?
If a state were to secede, it would then have to establish the programs other nation-states have--its own healthcare and welfare systems, which all already have to some degree. And there would be the need to establish some institutions states lack, like a mint for the already existing state treasury.
But what I'd like to see and think possible is for the states to rid themselves of the federal government and re-establish the Commonwealth. The 1787 constitution that established the current national government is an abomination, was imposed upon the people via a coup of rich men and brought into force by about 1/10 of the populous. The 1787 constitution had to be promoted to the status of Myth or par with the Bible so the elite could continue to use its provisions to rob the commonfolk.
The only people having words of praise for the US Empire are those it enriches. Most historians and commonfolk worldwide have different words for it and they aren't in any way flattering.
I think my left brain wants to secede from my right brain.
I have something to help you there...
Can you mail it?
anonymously...
When we in the pacific northwest finally succeed in seceding from the corporate plutocracies called Canada and the United States, and forming the Republic of Cascadia, we will exceed the nations of the earth in progressive intelligence, setting an example that will be an inspiration to all.
ooops, sorry, just got caught up in a bit of patriotic fervor.
"Northwest Exceptionalism"
Regional geographic blocs joining in commonwealth is another possibility to a new national commonwealth, or could become its basis.