Soft Secession, Insurrection, or the Real Return of Federalism in Texas?
January 27, 2024
In this year’s public blog two-part extravaganza I went over my predictions for 2024 (here and here). In them I brought up the idea that ‘soft secession’ would make it’s way into the public conversation in both the US and Canada. It wasn’t really a tough call to make but it was something that needed to be discussed in the public sphere.
We saw the beginnings of this last year with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith declaring she would not be collecting carbon taxes to send to Ottawa to fund Chrystia Freeland’s dreams of destroying the country.
Smith is in the news again with her pledge to further defy Ottawa by announcing Alberta would be looking to double oil and gas production. She did so at an event with Tucker Carlson in Edmonton. I’m not sure how Smith is going to go about this, since I do not explicitly understand the legal limits she can
defy Ottawa on this.But this is a big deal. Smith isn’t the only one here. Saskatchewan’s Scott Moe is following her lead on carbon taxes. This is a classic example of why we don’t need a majority of attack dogs to take on Davos and the rest of the globalists.
Not everyone is a leader, like Smith clearly is. Some are simply followers. They only make their move when someone else sticks their neck out first to find out whether it’ll get chopped off.
Many, including myself, admire Russian President Vladimir Putin for this exact reason. Donald Trump, in many ways, owes his popularity to this effect as well. It doesn’t matter if they make mistakes, are imperfect, or even fail to achieve ‘flawless victory.’ What matters is that they go first and lead on behalf of the people they are supposed to represent.
Back in 2019 Tucker Carlson made this exact point in one of his most important opening monologues:
By doing so they inspire others to take their first steps and what starts as a disgruntled handful of people bitching about the government around a campfire turns into a mass movement against tyranny.
This is exactly how the American Revolution started, in the pubs and meeting halls. It was the businessmen turned into smugglers and the farmers turned into sharecroppers that eventually put a critical mass of them into the same room hatching a plan to overthrow an absentee landlord of a king.
We’re seeing this all across the West. And if I have to give credit
where credit is more than due then that credit goes to the ‘Gilet
Jaunes’ or Yellow Vests of France. Remember them?
Velvet Revolutions: An...
Best Price: $35.71
Buy New $38.60
(as of 05:36 UTC - Details)
While they left the headlines quickly, because of the embarrassment, they never really went away. France has been in a state of rolling protests against the Macron government since then.
Gone to Texas?
We can easily draw a through-line from the Yellow Vests to the Canadian Truckers to the Dutch Farmers to Danielle Smith to the situation on the Texas border, which is clearly spiraling out of control but in a very good way.
Governor Greg Abbot’s letter to the Biden Administration declaring them in violation of the Constitution for stopping Texas from securing the border is a major escalation. The States have become ‘uncomfortable’ and are beginning to bare their canines.
For too long the States have gone along with Federal overreach because benefits of redistributing the tax money back to them outweighed the costs politically for those with higher aspirations. Governors of big states are always Presidential hopefuls of one stripe or another.
But there comes a point where the situation in DC is so predatory, so openly anathema to the health of the country itself, those aspirations have almost zero future value. That’s where Greg Abbot found himself with the Biden Administration’s open border policy whose obvious purpose was to invite the world to tilt the 2024 election in the Democrats’ favor… and by Democrats’ I mean Davos, whose agenda Biden et.al. are clearly advancing.
When the Supreme Court passed the buck, at least for the time being, on Texas’ right to secure its border, Abbot had to act. There are a number of solid defenses of Abbot from Mark Wauck and Martin Armstrong here but ultimately, the blame lies with “Biden” for not doing anything to secure the border.
Abbot’s Attorney General Ken Paxton backed him up and, as of today, 25 other States have openly expressed support for Texas’ stand against the lawlessness of “Biden’s” executive order.
You can see where this is headed folks. “Biden” is giving Texas an ultimatum to comply. The Democrats are demanding Biden call up the Texas National Guard. The entire thing has a wholly manufactured feel to it, but it is also something that had to happen. The States had to stand up to this.
And as I’ve talked about at length, the goal here is splitting the US up because a divided US, falling apart politically at this point in history, is exactly what our enemies want. The eventual goal is undermining the validity of the US debt markets and Washington D.C.’s ability to pay its bills.
There is no Great Reset with a fully functional United States.
This is why Abbot’s move is so very important. It’s not about the pols in D.C., it’s about awakening the proles across the country. The people now have to decide what country they want to live in going forward. One where the power of the gun rules or one where laws rule?
This is the type of moment which clarifies and sharpens the focus of those who have, to this point, been ‘comfortable’ enough not to see the threats for what they are. A little ‘secession’ or, in this case, a little ‘federalism’ is a good thing.
Because despite the smooth-brained arguments of the soft-headed midwits, we do not live in a democracy. The question I have now is what’s the over/under on “Biden” declaring Texas in a state of insurrection against the Union in order to deny it, as a State, its vote this fall?
If Texas refuses to ‘turn blue’ then the next move would be to maneuver its governor into full opposition to DC. The question I have here is who is in control of the escalation framework here? Texas or the FedGov?
If it’s Texas then they keep securing the border and proving that when push comes to shove, federalism returns to the public conversation. If it’s the FedGov, then given who we’re dealing with here, expect every ridiculous escalation you can imagine.
We’re talking about people trying to ban Donald Trump from the ballot over a riot on Capitol Hill less embarrassing than what the French do in Paris over a holiday weekend and which most people believe was a false flag event (and they would be correct). Do you really think they wouldn’t deny Texas their vote at an electoral college they don’t even like?
Reprinted with permission from Gold Goats ‘n Guns.
No comments:
Post a Comment