The most forbidden idea in US history by Tom Woods
The most forbidden idea in US history
All
this talk about Texas and defying the federal government has revived
healthy discussion of forbidden ideas like state nullification and even
secession -- both of which are excellent, morally praiseworthy, and
fully constitutional, even if mainstream opinion molders have done their
best to render them toxic and unthinkable.
These ideas are central to American history and the nature of the American Union, even if demonized by progressives.
Unfortunately, some of this demonization of the American tradition has trickled even into conservative and libertarian circles.
Over
the weekend I watched an 18-minute video by a lawyer on why states
(including Texas) can't secede from the Union. People assure me that
this lawyer is normally very sound.
A
lawyer is the very last person you should consult on issues like this.
He knows zero about the state ratification conventions, or the relevant
history. He has studied a bunch of court cases, some of which were
wrongly decided. This is the foundation of his knowledge.
This
particular fellow, for instance, thinks for some reason you can't
dissolve a founding document. Oh, but you can, sir. That's how the
Articles of Confederation were abandoned.
As
I explained on Friday, the United States was created by the sovereign
peoples of independent states, and was never at any time a single,
undifferentiated blob. I also noted that according to 18th-century
international law, a sovereign body joining a confederation becomes no
less sovereign. It does not alienate its sovereignty by so doing.
So
if a sovereign people join a confederation, that same people can
withdraw from it -- in both cases they are exercising the very same
sovereignty.
All the
relevant documents (including the Constitution itself) speak of the
United States in the plural. It was self-consciously not a centralized
regime in the way the French Revolutionary state would be. The United
States is rather a collection of sovereign peoples.
I
can cite tons of authorities -- Thomas Jefferson, or Alexis de
Tocqueville, or John Quincy Adams, or the textbook used at West Point in
the 19th century, to name only a few -- in favor of what I am saying
here.
Seek out the authors they've suppressed. That's always a good rule. Read St. George Tucker or (especially) Abel Upshur and his Brief Enquiry into the True Nature and Character of Our Federal Government. You will realize instantly why nobody ever told you about that book.
I've
spoken at length on this subject, and I've addressed all the arguments
of the "unbreakable Union" people. What a shame to see even
conservatives and libertarians who don't understand the nature of their
own country, and who simply repeat the regime's talking points.
The
20th century was a lesson in why large, centralized states are to be
feared, not welcomed. The United States was supposed to be a
counterexample to that.
Remember all those "American exceptionalism" people? Why do they then turn around and portray their country as being exactly like Frace, Spain, and all the other centralized regimes out there? Isn't the United States supposed to be, you know, different?
Now
you may tell me that state secession won't solve our problems, that
it's an unwise course of action, that now isn't the time for it, etc.
Those are all strategic questions, and people of good will may disagree
on them.
What I don't consider debatable is that the states have the right to do so. The testimony of the U.S. constitutional tradition as well as U.S. history at large will allow no other answer.
All you have to do is read chapter one of my book National Divorce (it's free, by the way) and you'll never be snookered by the centralizers again. Just chapter one:
No comments:
Post a Comment