Dear Red States…. We’ve decided we’re leaving. We intend to form our own country, we’re taking the other Blue States with us … that includes Hawaii, Oregon, California, New Mexico, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, and all the Northeast.Lanny Davis (tweet)
What should we think about prominent Democrats, like Lanny Davis, who want to divide America into two separate countries — along party lines?
In his Farewell Address, George Washington explained that union should be regarded as “the palladium” of our “political safety and prosperity….” Union is of such benefit, and disunion so harmful, he added, “there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.”
Washington warned against those who, in seeking disunion, misrepresent the opinions and aims of others: “You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.”
A government of the whole is “indispensable,” said Washington, if only for reasons of national defense. He explained, “No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced.” The Constitution which unifies us under one law, “is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.”
Anything destructive of these fundamental principles, warned Washington, will have “a fatal tendency.” Anything that serves to “organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force,” is to be discountenanced. Regular opposition to the acknowledged authority, and “the spirit of innovation upon its principles,” should also be discountenanced. Washington considered the “spirit of party” to be the very “worst enemy” of popular government:
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.
Washington warned that party strife “agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles animosity of one part against the other, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.” More dangerous yet, Washington warned that kindling such internal animosity “opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.” In other words, the United States, through this process, could become subject to a foreign power.
Talk of secession by a prominent Democrat, like former White House Special Counsel Lanny Davis, is no joke. He displays, in various tweets, a blazing hatred of Christians and conservatives, referring to them as “crazy bastards.” His high ideals amount to nothing more than bad manners, impudence, and degenerate cynicism.
You want to divide the country, Lanny? People of your ilk have been allowed to dominate our country far too long. Now we see what you are; that is to say, all those things you accuse others of being. Yes, Lanny, that’s right. You are divisive little man. A bigot. You have no charity for your own countrymen; and you have no true intellect, being incapable of appreciating the intellectual arguments of those you have denounced. Do you really think its honest — or even intelligent — to say an unborn human child isn’t human? Do you think its intelligent to suggest (by convoluted arguments) that our country shouldn’t have a border? — when every other country in the world has one! Is it your position that Trump is a warmonger and a Russian stooge? Look to your clients, Mr. Davis. You want to see a stooge of Russia and China? The Clintons fit the description far better than President Trump.
Divide this country at your own peril, Mr. Davis. The Union is indivisible. Millions have fought for it and millions will fight again. And now you bare your leftist fangs, as if to impress us. Many of us already know what you are. Yes, we see you clearly: — we see your traitor’s heart, your corrupt clients, your dysfunctional blue cities (like San Francisco and New York) being handed to thugs and criminals. Everything in your world smells like an open sewer. We get it. We do.
You’re a subversive, Mr. Davis, and now you’re an advocate of treason. So here are a few choice lines on your project from Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida:
O, when degree is shak’d,
Which is the ladder to all high designs,
Then enterprise is sick! How could communities,
Degrees in schools and brotherhoods in cities,
Peaceful commerce from dividable shores,
The primogenity and due of birth,
Prerogative of age, crowns, sceptres, laurels,
But by degree away, untune that string,
And hark what discord follows! Each thing meets
In mere oppugnancy. The bounded waters
Should lift their bosoms higher than the shores
And make a sop of all this solid globe;
Strength should be lord of imbecility,
And the rude son should strike his father dead;
Force should be right; or rather, right and wrong
(Between whose endless jar justice resides)
Should lose their names, and so should justice too.
Then everything includes itself in power,
Power into will, will into appetite;
And appetite, an universal wolf,
So doubly seconded with will and power,
Must make perforce an universal prey,
And last eat up himself.
23 thoughts on “Democrat Secession Talk”
I want to stand up and cheer for your latest essay, Mr. Nyquist.
I am disturbed that so many Americans respond to secession talk as if breaking up the country is acceptable (because it’s a case of “good riddance”). If you want to see Chinese and Russian troops at our doorstep, then you can wink at it. Otherwise we are, as Americans, duty bound to make war on it. And I do mean war.
With traitors like Gavin Newsom, governor of California, we will have the PLA inside the door, not just on the doorstep. And that’s without a secession.
It is scary to realize how dangerous these internal enemies are.
Jeff, thank you for the hours and hours, even multiple years, of study and applying yourself to knowledge and wisdom. Very hard work. Many understand this and are very grateful. Please keep it up
There will be Civil War before succession of “blue” states and Lanny is a fool to not understand that there are not “blue” states, but vastly conservative states with “blue” cities. New York State is a perfect example. All red but downstate. They get their water from upstate. No way is upstate New York going to succeed. Wonder what the gullible NYC folk are going to drink and eat when upstate revolts at their tyranny?
Democrats act like they are possessed. I think they have Jezabel syndrome (I will destroy anyone who doesn’t give me what I want and gets in my way? Waaaa Waaaa).
Wish I had a better answer than what history shows us happens to a country infested with such Jezabel behaviors.
Thank you for another well written and insightful essay. I do hope moving is going well. We’d love to have you as a neighbor in our long forgotten neck of the woods. Any day.
There will be woods where I am headed….
Will there be trout too?
Brandon Smith of Alt Market sees secession – or “balkanization” as he terms it – as an ostensibly good thing, insofar as it would reduce the leftist contagion in the remainder… he is totally ignoring, of course, various aspects of the bigger picture, especially the immovable fact that the communist appetite is insatiable and means to stop at nothing short of the total subjugation of the planet. In the past, B Smith has poured scorn on the idea of a possible global war so presumably he sees no menace in a seceded west coast in dalliance with a ruthlessly ambitious and aggressive China:
America defends the world from Russia and China. We divide our strength and it’s game over. This treason puts all our lives at risk.
Lanny Davis, like most other Dhimmicrats (read Marxist/Communists) will do whatever it takes to destroy the USA, ripping it a part just to fuel their hatred of life itself. Hate is all that Lanny Davis has, which will consume him before he can see the results of his hatred.
The coming Constitutional crisis that his kind are hoping to produce by undermining the November 2020 Presidential elections, will destroy them first, as hatred can only fuel itself with more hatred, and eventually all of that hate consumes itself, leaving in it’s wake destruction. The destruction will not bring what Lanny and his ilk are hoping for as it will not be wide spread enough to bring the country down.
We will survive, and Lanny and his kind will perish.
Hope so. It’s not a given. Victory over him and his nasty ilk won’t come served up on a silver platter.
“I prefer peace. But if trouble must come, let it come in my time, so that my children can live in peace.” – Thomas Paine
It’s easy to get disgusted and want to say: good riddance. Thank you Jeff for your timely reminder that there is much more at stake! “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” Abraham Lincoln
Praying for tonight’s debate!
Jeff, Sun Tzu said, “ Humble words and increased preparations are signs that the enemy is about to advance. Violent language and driving forward as if to attack are signs that he will retreat.” How do the aggressive actions and bellicose rhetoric we see from China fit in to this? Should we take it as a sign they are all bluster, (at present)?
They are not using bellicose language on us. Rather, they are preaching war to our own people while alleging peaceful intentions in international meetings. Thus, China has two faces. Not one.
When G. Gordon Liddy still had his radio show, he would have Davis on occasionally to “defend the indefensible.” This was during the Clinton Administration. Davis never failed to make a fool of himself. He especially made a fool of himself trying to apologize for the behavior of the Clintons towards the last of Slick Willie’s misrule.
Davis is simply being a fool again. Outside of the deep blue cities there is little desire for secession.
Do you consider the confederates to have been traitors, Jeff?
I think the Confederate secessionists were pretty crazy in their ideas. They directly opposed the ideas of the Founding Fathers in favor of white supremacy and African slavery. Look at CSA Vice President Alexander Stephen’s “Cornerstone Speech.” Not a system of liberty, but a system holding down huge numbers of inhabitants in slavery based on race. How workable such a plan was, given the economic backwardness of slavery as a system, also given the breaking of the Southern politicians’ oaths to the United States, is perfectly clear. These people could not grasp the times or the measure of place. They were not wise. And it compromised their honor to carry on in this way. And by strict interpretation of law, it was treason and rebellion. Did they have good cause to revolt? Wishing to dominate the federal government and spread slavery to the territories are not good reasons to divide a great nation. I think not. But there are many who would violently disagree, yet the war happened and the outcome was what it was. Washington’s wishes were fulfilled by Lincoln. A nation formed on the basis of African slavery is not likely to have prospered economically or politically even if the North had acquiesced in their departure. Certainly, the North did not want a Civil War; yet the South had no political realism as to how to avoid enraging the North, as with the attack on Fort Sumter. You just can’t be so politically inept and hope to carve a new country out of an existing one. And if anyone says the war wasn’t caused by slavery, they’re not reading the secession speeches that led to the breakup. The whole secession was based on slavery. Sorry.
Toombs tried to get the Confed Government to refrain from reducing Sumter. Regardless of Lincoln’s machinations, The attack was what he wanted and allowed the inspiration of war fever in the north. It would have been interesting to the result of the troops manning the fort had fired on a British ship because they would not heave to, or accept a northern tax collector.
I find it interesting that the the north appointed two prominent lawyers to prosecute Jefferson Davis for treason, and both stated that they could not prosecute him because what he did was not treason. One was Richard Dana, author of “Two years Before The Mast” and hated the Confederates because a raider sunk the ship he had served in that is prominent in the book.
Nobody knew what the public reaction to Sumter’s fall would be. Lincoln could not have known it, or made any plan based on the clairvoyance that would have been required. Most of his advisors did not care about the fort and wanted it abandoned. Lincoln actually dithered and was criticized for procrastinating. He was caught up in organizing the government. He even suffered exhaustion, becoming short-tempered. Most things of this nature do not happen by evil design. Everyone was then caught off guard by public reaction, which no politician anticipated. Of course, not attacking would have been prudent. But the South did not bother to restrain the action. Neither were any real apologies offered. They could have given the fort back. As for Dana, I would not go by the judgment of such a radical. Davis swore an oath to uphold the Constitution when he served in high office. He later broke that oath and became an enemy of the United States. In this case, goodness knows by what convoluted logic you get out of an oath — “so help me, God” to turn a country against itself. One may think treason is okay, or excusable under the circumstances — but it’s still treason.
Jeff, I have just been made aware of your blog through the offices of the Common Sense show. And although I do not always agree with Mr. Hodges I want to thank you for being on there and look forward to your return. I have just ordered your books. Your Ideas are certainly well thought out and provocative. I’m making reading your stuff a “must do”. Question, straight forward, do you really believe the Chinese are an imminent threat?
Yes. The Chinese are an immediate threat provided the Russians support them. I do not think China would make war alone. Their strength is not sufficient given the international reaction.
Comments are now closed.