Keeping The Secession Option On The Table

Imagine There’s No Union

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “I say the secession option ought to always be on the table.  The other option that ought to always be on the table if the secession option doesn’t tickle your fancy, then how about the divide-the-state option?  This one actually holds out even more hope if you think of it in the proper sense.”  Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Audio Clip of The Day files, Project 76 feature presentations, Church Doctrine audio & video clips and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike

HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW! FOR HUNDREDS MORE CLIPS, VISIT THE CLIP OF THE DAY ARCHIVE HERE

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Two things that I said we should always keep on the table, as the war hawks like to keep on the table, [mocking] “The military option is always on the table with the Iranians, you see.”  Never on the table with the Ayatollahs and all the madrasa running madmen in Saudi Arabia.  But hey, are we going to split hairs here over terrorists?  I mean, really, the Sauds are our buddies, right?  In any event, the military option is always on the table.  I say the secession option ought to always

[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]

be on the table.  The other option that ought to always be on the table if the secession option doesn’t tickle your fancy, then how about the divide-the-state option?  This one actually holds out even more hope if you think of it in the proper sense.

Let’s say we take Louisiana, for example.  If you were to say northwestern Louisiana, or probably most of the northern part of Louisiana, from Alexandria on up, those people are vastly different kind of people than the people that are in the southern part of Louisiana, certainly in the southeastern part.  So you say: You guys ought to form your own state.  You ought to call at Monrovia.  We have a couple of nifty-sounding parish names.  Or call it the state of Bossier, if you will.  In the middle of the state you guys can call yourselves — let Alexandria be the capital and north of Alexandria will be Bossieria, and the South all the way down to somewhere around Lafayette or so would be Alexandria.  Then in the western part of the state, those people are a little different than the rest of the state.  Say from the Mississippi River west could then be Acadiana.  We have three states now.

If you go to any of these areas, there are easily recognizable cultures there, traditions, customs, language even. Acadiana, Alexandria, & Bossieria.  Now we make our way and we’ll just let this one

be called New Orleans.  New Orleans and Mitch Landrieu, if you want to strip New Orleans of all of its beauty and its charm and its history and scrub all of the names off of every single one of the streets, you go right ahead in the little republic and we’ll let you call it New Orleans.  For the remaining part, which would be from the Iberville River, what used to be the Iberville River — it’s called Pass Manchac today.  From Pass Manchac all the way up to the — this is the old boundary of the Florida Parishes, that straight line across the top of the Louisiana boot and the bottom of the Mississippi — it’s not a boot but you know what I’m talking about, that parallel line, all the way to the Pearl River, which is the dividing line between Mississippi and Louisiana.  We can then just restore the Florida Parish Republic.

I’ve just divided Louisiana into five very distinct, very unique, and decently populated little states.  Each one gets its own governor.  If we’re dumb enough to reenter the Union, and we shouldn’t, each one would get two United States senators.  Just imagine that a senator actually has to answer to 700,000 people instead of 7 million or 17 million or 27 million.  A member of the House of Representin’, you’re not going to be able to have — if you divide it up as I’m saying, would the people then be satisfied with just having, of all of Bossieria, just having one member in the House of Representin’?  I basically gave you the division by congressional district.  One member of the House of Representin’ for the Florida Parish Republic, etc.?  Would they?  No.  They’d say: That’s not fair.  You’d be right.  If Congress isn’t going to reapportion the House of Representin’ and give us a representative of every 40,000 people there so, then we’re not going to join your silly union.

We’ve just participated in a really exciting experiment in self-government.  It is easy to conceive, from what I’ve just told you and described, that one if not several of those new entities could do what?  Draft and form their own constitutions, proclaim themselves their own sovereign entities, and they could even place themselves under the kingship of Jesus Christ in their constitutions.  You see, folks, we’re trained to be a bunch of mindless robots and to never think outside the proverbial American box because then we’d be dishonoring the founders if we did that.  Really?  I guess the founders

[/private]

then dishonored themselves when they did it to their English ancestors.

Even if you were to run this exercise, just imagine doing this in Texas.  You can make 30 states out of Texas, 30 little republics out of Texas.  You might even have to divide Dallas and Houston-Fort Worth into separate — they may have to have their own little federation there if people were thinking clearly about these things.  They may wish to then join the Texas Federation as Western Houstonians.  This is how the ancient Greek republics were divvied.  This is what made them up.  This is how Italy was divided before it was conquered by the Marxists and Socialists who formed into one gelatinous blob of Italy.

When we think about how much we’re in debt and all these other problems we have, we’re told we have to think of them collectively.  In other words, people of Louisiana must accept the same solution that the people of Vermont must accept.  What if I don’t like Vermont’s solution?  Why do I have to accept it?  This is the folly of oligarchy.  This is the folly of the current and present system.  It can’t possibly satisfy any of those things, and it can’t possibly leave in our hands actual self-government.  It also does great damage to even the concept of self-government.  It basically tells you, [mocking] “Even if I vote, my vote for president doesn’t count anyway.  That’s what you said, Mike.”  I did say it and I’ll say it again.  It doesn’t.  Two parties are going to have their way with you and with me unfortunately, and with my daughters and stepson and your daughters and sons.  Maybe we can start thinking differently about these things, which is why I like Stephen Masty’s essay about “Should We Stop Dumb People from Voting?”  Yes.  That whole taxation with representation thing has been an unmitigated human disaster, mostly.

End Mike Church Show Transcript