The Statist Quo: Breaking Bad and Worse by Bill Buppert

“Successor to a sinister inheritance, reared among fierce conditions and moving through ferocious times, he supplied those qualities of action and personality without which the foundations of Irish nationhood would not have been re-established.”

– Winston Churchill describing Michael Collins

Secession is the rule and not the exception throughout history.

Uti possidetis juris, as it stands at the present, is based on two ideas: self-determination and the non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. It emanates from the Treaty of Westphalia and flows forward in history. The Treaty is often cited as a touchstone of First Generation Warfare. In the end, all secession comes down to self-determination at the lowest level. Many in libertarian circles, including myself, insist that secession begins at the atomistic level and succeeds from there. The very distillate of secession is the freedom to choose and opt-out from circumstances that negate your ability to be free.

So the Queen is concerned that a Scottish secession would change the United Kingdom? The First Flatulence in the White House is wondering why the IS fighters are refusing to recognize Western-penciled borders? The Ukraine and Russia fight over a partition that serves one or the other. In the last disagreement, the US is firmly in the camp of keeping the statist quo intact. This in spite of official flip-flopping on when secession is good and when it isn’t..

One of the reasons the US has such a conflicted relationship with secession is the muddled history that teaches contemporary Americans that secession is bad after the American Revolution (1775-83); the divorce from the UK then was good but the Confederate aspirations to mimic that success would not be tolerated under any conditions. Similar displeasure was expressed at Texan ambitions to separate from the Union and all succeeding secessionist movements within the US have been discouraged and crushed where necessary. Silly wankers in Alaska actually wanted to put it to a vote; this was, of course, declared illegal by the Federal courts.

The US frowns on secession when it suits their needs and encourages it otherwise such as the wholesale calving of the former USSR and Yugoslavia in the last decade of the twentieth century. With few exceptions, most nation states, particularly in the West, fight the calving off of constituent parts. While I would be hard-pressed to justify any military intervention by the US since 1893, a brief look at the adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan provide many primers on how not to conduct a conflict. Both cases show a dogged determination to maintain Western-penciled borders in the aforementioned countries agnostic to tribal and blood clan division that make the forced cohabitation a powder keg in the best of times.

Afghanistan is an imaginary country and during my year-long sojourn there in 2013, a mere dozen years after the American folly began in 2001, no western country much less the Afghans themselves could settle on the total number of districts or provinces in the country. The infrastructure was still fifth world and the absurd dysfunction of all the security forces made light of the six districts in solid Taliban control since 2001. Outside of Kabul, the central government doesn’t exist except in the raw form of brute violence visited by government security forces in concert with the NATO ground forces’ occasional forays outside heavily Westernized compounds or ill-conceived operating bases located at the bottom of valleys.

In a way, Afghanistan is a one-stop shopping experience for why the state is a murderous highwayman putting a boot on the face of humanity from both a Western and indigenous government perspective.

Suspending all disbelief in the horrendous error that US military involvement is good and virtuous, how might a rational actor have contended with the alleged problem? The primary difficulty, besides the gargantuan strategic deficit disorder that informs the entire American military project planet-wide, is the stubborn insistence that borders can’t change unless convenient to the external actors involved much like the advantage of approving of the dismantling of the two Eurasian nations mentioned earlier. Imagine if partition, secession or provincial devolution had been proposed that would have reduced the Afghanistan state into a number of constituent components. The same applies to relieve the pressure of Kurds, Sunni and Shia fighting to live together in a cage not of their own making. Even when Hussein was the warden, he conducted horrific violence against the denizens of his jurisdiction to keep the kettle from boiling over.

All of this begs the question of why the US would do that. Besides the money laundering aspects for the vast Western national security state apparatus of armed global meddling, the US government does not have the moral or political imagination to think that devolution or secession is necessary because it fears the repercussions at home. The old saw that whatever empire practices abroad will come home in spades is a meme in the minds of the rulers and elites in the West. Ask the subjects in the UK surveillance state.

Whether Republicans or Democrats, the apologists for the US mega-state think it is outside the realm of polite conversation to even contemplate much less openly discuss the possibility of breaking apart what has become an untenable project in the US to sustain individual liberty and freedom. These are the same people who will smirk at your tinfoil hat notions when you talk about the New World Order or one world government yet become deadly serious in their defense of the same idiotic notion for the tax jurisdiction in America. If America is too big to fail, why not be a booster for one world government; if severe and bloated concentrations of power in a few hands under a Federal dominion is good for America, why not the world?

The administrators in DC could no more approve the breakup of the US than Lincoln did to cement the bond and open plantation membership to all the American people after the conclusion of that unpleasantness in the nineteenth century.

England is instructive in this regard. After WWII, when the Empire was reeling from imminent bankruptcy and the rupture of the Imperial Project, it simply lorded over a few rocks like Diego Garcia and Ascension Island scattered around the globe after 1948 with the liberation of India. While the UK lost most of the planets in its imperial orbit after WWII, it still fought vicious battles both overt and covert in Malaya, Oman, Aden, Falklands and, of course, the 800 year battle to retain the Northern Irish under the English yoke.

If you see a dim future for America, you would be wise to examine the most thoroughly documented successful secessionist project in the twentieth century in the West and it’s all in English for both primary and secondary source documentation. The Irish Rebellion (1916-22) is illustrative of many of the aspects of the successful guerrilla conflict in many aspects and the British response is precisely the textbook example on how to bollocks a counterinsurgency. Michael Collins proved to be one of history’s great captains of insurgency against a much more wealthy foe. The lessons not to be gleaned are the socialist quagmires created in Eire afterwards; the successful divorce and the same collectivist nonsense will saddle a future independent Scotland in its bid to be prosperous and self-sufficient. The success of Northern Ireland to fight a rather successful campaign against the rest of the 800-year occupation by the English is instructive for the latter half of the century. The lessons learned can be gleaned by the careful student of resistance and rebellion.

The regime in DC thinks secession is a four-letter word but soon enough they will have to spell it correctly as the kettle boils over and they start to rewrite the military manuals and police instructions to battle the many divorce papers that will fly across the transom in Mordor on the Potomac as the economy collapses and the regime starts to receive push-back from the endless bullying, theft and regulation of the unfortunate citizens still residing in the US.

Resist.

“Law and order in Ireland have given place to a bloody and brutal anarchy, in which the armed agents of the Crown violate every law in aimless and vindictive and insolent savagery.”

– General Sir Hubert Gough, Commander of the Fifth Army in France, after the use of the “Black and Tans” and the Auxilliaries in Ireland.

“There is no crime in detecting and destroying in wartime the spy and informer. They have destroyed without trial. I have paid them back in their own coin.” 

– Michael Collins commenting on Bloody Sunday, when his men gunned down British spies in Dublin.

Bill Buppert
thirdgun@hotmail.com
20 Comments
  • MamaLiberty
    Posted at 05:52h, 12 September Reply

    That last is a tough one. At what point do the defenders become aggressors? Can we ever truly define that outside of individual circumstances? Can we survive otherwise? I wish I knew.

    • PJ
      Posted at 16:40h, 12 September Reply

      Panarchy is the answer. Secession is a dispute between governments, and no government is legitimate – not even the one that secedes.

      Much better than conventional (state) secession would be a simultaneous declaration of individual secession among those inclined to leave. For those who aren’t, we simply wish them well and promise no strife if they bring none to us.

      Why simultaneous? “Safety in numbers” and mutual support against any oppression.

      • Bill
        Posted at 17:26h, 12 September Reply

        PJ,

        I welcome the idea and if a stateless society can emerge from secession, that would certainly be my preference.

        My difficulty is being next neighbors with collectivists of any stripe who historically cannot leave individuals the fuck alone.

        Bill

  • GenEarly
    Posted at 10:58h, 12 September Reply

    As an unrepentant Confederate, and a Revolutionary War Patriot from the South;
    I concur.

    • Bill
      Posted at 13:05h, 12 September Reply

      I’m a Good Ol’ Rebel


      Oh, I’m a good old rebel,
      Now that’s just what I am,
      And for this yankee nation,
      I do no give a damn.
      I’m glad I fought a ganner,
      I only wish we won.
      I ain’t asked any pardon for anything I’ve done.

      I hates the yankee nation and everything they do.
      I hates the declaration of independence, too.
      I hates the glorious union, t’is dripping with our blood.
      I hates the striped banner, and fit it all I could

      I rode with Robert E. Lee,
      For three years, thereabout.
      Got wounded in four places,
      And I starved at point lookout.
      I catched the rheumatism
      A campin’ in the snow.
      But I killed a chance of Yankees
      And I’d like to kill some more.

      3 hundred thousand Yankees
      Is stiff in southern dust.
      We got 3 hundred thousand
      Before they conquered us
      They died of Southern Fever
      And southern steel and shot
      I wish there were 3 million
      Instead of what we got.
      I can’t pick up my musket
      And fight ‘um down no more
      But I ain’t gonna love ‘um
      Now that is certain sure
      And I don’t want no pardon
      For what I was and am
      I won’t be reconstructed
      And I do not give a damn

      Oh, I’m a good old rebel,
      Now that’s just what I am,
      And for this yankee nation,
      I do no give a damn.
      I’m glad I fought a ganner,
      I only wish we won.
      I ain’t asked any pardon for anything I’ve done.
      I aint asked any pardon for anything I’ve done.

  • Ebola Obama
    Posted at 11:54h, 12 September Reply

    Raise the black flag cry the no nothings.

    • Bill
      Posted at 13:02h, 12 September Reply

      “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” I wonder if Mencken has inspired the IS forces in the ME?

  • Wise Cave Owl
    Posted at 19:59h, 12 September Reply

    you cannot have a Society without a State. The Violence of Human Nature necessitates the State. Now we have way too much State, and that tyrannical State has to be destroyed by Society. But when the dust settles, there will still be a State, and an eternal struggle to keep it Limited

    • Roger Young
      Posted at 07:33h, 13 September Reply

      “The Violence of Human Nature necessitates the State.”

      If that is true, then why give a handful of such creatures a highly armed institution with which to lord over others……and commit acts of unaccountable violence?
      Why make it easy for such psychopaths to kill, steal, and destroy?

      “Limited government” is an illusion. The motivation to grow in power is just as inherent in this institution as the motivation to commit violence you claim in human individuals. After all, it’s those SAME individuals with a violent nature who make up that institution.

      • Jim Klein
        Posted at 19:26h, 17 September Reply

        Nice reply, Roger. I thought that was quite a claim, myself. I wonder what happened to Wise Cave Owl; I hope he’s okay and is evading your comment by choice.

    • methylamine
      Posted at 20:24h, 15 September Reply

      So the State is comprised of angels, not humans?
      Otherwise, the State is simply a criminal gang writ large–as Rothbard said.

      You cannot have a society without mutually agreed-upon codes of conduct–and THAT is the brilliance of Common Law, derived from Natural Law.

      It is the smallest subset of law that is palatable to all but the inveterate sociopath…who will be bound by no law anyway, and will (no coincidence) also become “the law” when there is a State available to hijack.

      All people can agree that coercion, theft, assault, and murder are wrong. Beyond that, you’re venturing into malum prohibitum–and that’s where the State comes in with all its twisted evil.

  • Boon Vickerson is out there
    Posted at 20:39h, 14 September Reply

    Hey Bill, great essay.
    You know something? Been a long time, since revolutionary sovereignty has taken place in the world. Like since 1865. The world is permeated with tyranny. The “State” has kept a stranglehold on the idea of sovereign persons and liberty. And nothing remotely like the declaration of independence has happened since.

    Funny thing that huh?

    It makes for a drab unexciting world from the standpoint of great enlightenment and events that characterize the best in men.
    The article CA linked to on the supposed pitfalls of Scottish secession pointedly neglects what people want, what the sovereign thinking man desires. It is all about the needs of the State.

    Funny that too.

    It is that way wherever you look outside the liberty blog and alternative media sphere of thinking. It is as if people, the little people do not exist. The media studiously ignores the plurality of freedom. Entire systems of state all across the world ignore the will of people. It is a plague open the world.

    And what about us Bill? Can the Scots pull it off. And if they do, secede, could it be the spark that changes the world?
    Lord love a duck you know there’s enough people completely fed the fuck up with the meddling and lawless nature of the Westphalia and bankster Nomenclatura system of dominion over people.

    There is a yearning in the hearts of men of late for something even beyond just simple liberty below our feet, you can almost sense it. The world has been turned into a wasteland of state run cultural and spiritual diaspora since those heady days of the 5000 year leap.
    Its enough to make a man think revolutionary thoughts to remove the yoke of tyranny from his shoulders, the burden of elitist malaise on ones heart and soul. Chains I say, chains of slavery.

    Secession in some form seems like a very attractive thing.

    God knows what we are saddled with isn’t working out too well. The psychopaths running things are only getting crazier and greedier for money and power as what they have wrought comes unglued. At what point in the inherent vulnerabilities in their madness does resistance to tyranny have a degree of success?

    Secession is unequivocally a revolt to the status quo. It is an unmistakable middle finger to the bastards and their bullshit.

    Having said all that, how did the Scots manage to get as far as they did with a referendum? Not how they did it, but why was it not squashed or nipped in the bud?

    Serious question.

    Because the answer of how, is key to the spread of secession if the Scots pull it off. Short of vote fraud if a majority is voting in favor, how did this slip by the sonofabitches to get as far as a vote?

    There is something very important in the answers I believe we all need to know.

    • Bill
      Posted at 09:24h, 15 September Reply

      Boon,

      You should be writing this blog, not me.

      I need to post what you put at WRSA so posterity can wrap its arms around it.

      The Porcupines movement is a start. And you have to begin somewhere. The fact it drives statists pluperfect crazy and they have labeled the Free Stater’s a terrorist organization is indicative it is a viable movement. If nothing else it is a plurality, and there ain’t nothing on Gods green Earth tyrants despise more than a plurality of people.

      Besides, how has voting our way out working out?

      Voting with your feet is a very powerful action. It is liberty exercised and tyranny excised.

      Kinda like building a rifle with an 80% lower. The sonofabitches are terrified of people who do such things. There is nothing directly they can do to stop people. They are acts of freedom which only threaten an illegitimate tyrannical regime and the psychopaths who control it.

      I think it goes down like this:

      Enough people begin to figure out there is no voting our way out of this.
      Working people begin to reach a breaking point.
      A preference cascade begins.
      A gestalt in thinking where people grok the enormity of the lies of the media have hidden the truth that millions and millions of Americans are not alone in their frustrations and concerns. Which I see is beginning to cascade.
      It then calls for redress and protest take on an entire different character.

      At this point those running things are faced with the tyrants dilemma.

      They must act to nip this strident resistance of the productive class in the bud because once begun it can not be put back in its bottle. But they must be very cunning in how this is achieved. That is where the decade long pogrom of classifying millions as right wing extremists and domestic terrorists, all the false flag crisis as a means, the “racist” connotations attached to white America, all the predictable monkey tricks and shit stirring, the divide and conquer tactics and social engineering come into full play.

      Hard to say what methods and tolls will be used. But the list is long and illustrious. I think Matt Bracken and Max Velocity exemplified in their novels of survival and resistance the most probable use of power the ruling class will employ.

      It is important to note the good will of appearance of legitimacy and the aptly coined term Mandate of Heaven is most thread bare. A mere fig leaf of legitimate power remains to the regime. It is a delicate balance which must be maintained between that faux legitimacy and the real power behind the bastards, the gun. To be exact it is the use of force and threat of violence, implementation and maintenance of an entitlement/police state that stands in for legitimate consent of the governed and Republican form of representative government.

      But what is critical is as resistance in all the myriad forms it takes begins to mount, the claws of the tyrants come out. It is then we go from less than overt disguised acts of repression, to open violent repressive targeting of the greatest threats to power.
      It will seem to arrive in escalating quality of violence and imposition of draconian measures at repressing rebellion. A slew of handy scapegoats will be utilized to justify the states totalitarian efforts.

      And that is the defining moment. Can the regime formerly known as the federal government retain its appearance of legitimacy? Do those who resist become manifest in their natural unalienable legitimacy of sovereign freemen?

      This is the moment of a sea change in thinking of people. Where the truths of our predicament, the tempest in a tea pot, a paradigm shift in perceptions and how ones principles and beliefs supersede the needs and power of the state.

      For the actors running things this is their defining moment also. And brother it is a whopper of a conundrum. At this juncture the truth is they the tyrants have lost control. Sure they have lots of guns, they have momentum of the leviathan, they control information, they have a certain high ground tactically and strategically, they control movement of food energy and people, but the one thing which is critical they have lost control of how millions of Americans think and how they perceive the state and most critical of all those running it and their mechanisms of control and imposition of that control.

      Yet even more alarming and dangerous for the bastards is people begin to grasp this personally. And in unity. This constitutes a plurality of people who truly withdraw consent, who become aware they are a plurality. This awakening becomes manifold.

      Who knows how the rest plays out. But I’ll bet a right arm the regimes in desperation out of fear of loosing becomes very violent. Nothing, as it really is now, but cunningly disguised, is openly beyond them.

      Use of force and violent bloody acts of repression take over. In doing so the tempest is released and there are no voices of authority or mechanisms of civil society remaining which can stop it. Certainly those in power can not stop even if they wanted to. They must be stopped. That will become the only natural method possible.

      And the only people who can do that is the little people. Which if you think about it is as it should be, and if we are deadly honest with ourselves always has been as it is ourselves who really got ourselves in this pickle to begin with simply because we where not vigilant in our affairs of liberty.

    • Bill
      Posted at 09:33h, 15 September Reply

      You know, Boon, it is a whole inquiry in and of itself that should examine how the Scots referendum did survive to get on the ballot and I know the UK will regret the decision.

      You would never see such tolerance from Mordor on such a plebiscite in the USSA.

      As I have mentioned, secession cannot take root in the USSA until individuals take the decision to start to separate themselves from the body politic and form a whole independent social ecology based on peace, persuasion and commercial cooperation with strangers (the basic building block of free capital and contract). Once that “gray-market or underground agora” and anarchos is underway, the real revolution begins.

      The answer is not political but apolitical, the notion that creation of a just and peaceful society rests not on electing strangers to violently enforce a society but the idea that free armed individuals will balance out the bad. The whole framework of democracy rests on the myth that you need the worse people in charge of every aspect of your life at the point of a gun to protect you from a few bad people. That is insanity but that is the planet as it exists today.

      Bill

      • Boon Vickerson is out there
        Posted at 11:41h, 15 September Reply

        Man if that ain’t the truth, I’ll be a monkeys uncle, Bill.

        WooHoo! Good stuff.

        By all means I trust you to do whatever you like with anything I write. And thanks for the complement, that is special coming from you let me tell you.

        Besides, that is what happens when you inspire others with reasoned thought and the truth, and isn’t that why you yourself write to begin with Bill?

        To change the world?

      • Boon Vickerson is out there
        Posted at 12:09h, 15 September Reply

        Yes you said that so very well Bill. It’s hearts and minds, it’s indomitable spirit.

        I think one of the keys as you said is free enterprise, if for no other reason unless your feeding at the public trough or gaming the system of culture of corruption government is become, there are not many freedoms as liberating as being one’s economic master. That’s liberty defined down to the daily and personal level. It’s empowering as no other endeavor short of revolutionary war for liberty can be.

        Yet, it is secession that is the wisest of courses. It lifts all boats, it nullifies every concept of state power, it empowers the individual, it makes equality of all men equally accessible.

        If you espouse the virtues and principles of liberty, secession is a natural component of liberty, if only for the simple truth liberty can not coexist within the boundaries and limitations of the power of the state over the individual freedoms.

        Proof is all around us as testament to the failure of the state and its actors.

  • Jim Klein
    Posted at 18:56h, 15 September Reply

    “It is as if people, the little people do not exist.”

    Yep, that’s their flawed premise. Should be quite a sight, when reality arbitrates that one.

    • Boon Vickerson is out there
      Posted at 05:49h, 16 September Reply

      You vassal, Jim!

      Your nothing. Your a bug that can be squashed with impunity.

      Behold the glorious omnipotence of those in power, quake with fear from the authority they hold to be true over your chattel soul, bow to the force and violence they wield, their apparatchiks and Praetorian guard protect and serve the dark master and his ring wraiths.
      Be grateful you are permitted to pay a mighty toll for the privilege of living in the shadows of such a beneficent leviathan.

  • Boon Vickerson is out there
    Posted at 00:11h, 18 September Reply
  • A Centralized Authority demands no People or State be Independent and Free | Head Space
    Posted at 02:08h, 13 September Reply

    […] Uti possidetis juris, as it stands at the present, is based on two ideas: self-determination and the non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. It emanates from the Treaty of Westphalia and flows forward in history. The Treaty is often cited as a touchstone of First Generation Warfare. In the end, all secession comes down to self-determination at the lowest level.  –Bill Buppert, The Statist Quo: Breaking Bad and Worse […]

Post A Comment