Tag Archives: Wall Street Journal

Comparing Catalonia and the Confederacy—States and Nations (with notes on the Monstrosity of Moderation in Media)

SPAIN TRIED AND FAILED TO SUPPRESS A VOTE FOR SECESSION IN ITS WEALTHY NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF CATALONIA TODAY (Sunday October 1, 2017).  According to the latest tally I have seen on the BBC, 2,020,144 Catalan voters cast their ballots in favor of an Independent Republic, centered on the Mediterranean seaport of Barcelona.  These two million plus voters constituted 90.09% of the 42-43% of the eligible electorate who voted, but Spain itself had urged pro-Spanish “no” voters to stay away from the Polls, and the massive police intervention and use of force must have discouraged some….

Although during the past 42 years that “Francisco Franco is still dead,” Spain has acknowledged the right of the several nationalities (Basque, Galician, Catalan) to assert regional autonomy, Spain has declared this vote illegal and non-binding. The Central Government of Spain in Madrid has been arguing ever since the election of the pro-Independence party in September of 2015,  that Catalonia’s vote was going to be “illegal” and they threatened to, and actually did, try to suppress the vote by Police Action.  

Most of the world (which has spoken) has either come out expressly in favor or seems tacitly on the side of Catalans who want independence.  Only Madrid and the Spanish government seem strongly against it—fearful, undoubtedly, of losing prime Mediterranean beach resorts, Barcelona (the second largest city in Spain, seventh largest and “most successful” in all Europe), plus the Balearic Islands (Majorca, Menorca, Ibiza and Formentera).  In essence, Catalonia includes some of the best real estate IN ALL OF EUROPE AND THE CIRCUM MEDITERRANEAN WORLD.  This is indeed “the Spanish Riviera”.

The comparison to the Secession of the Confederate States of America is obvious, but it isn’t getting much currency in the U.S. or British Media, despite the fact that the Confederate States have made a renewed appearance in the news since April, here in New Orleans and around the USA…. and even in the consciousness of the whole world.

So, since nobody else is making the comparison (that I’ve seen so far, anyhow, I will).   In 1860, the Southern states formed (per capita) the richest part of the United States.   Catalonia had better hope that world opinion remains on its side!    Because Spain has its eyes and tax collectors all focused on this rich province, and history tells us that the rich can be laid low when they try to retain their wealth….

For the record, Catalonia was originally, and has always considered itself, a separate “Nationality” (i.e. ethnolinguistic group). During the Middle Ages, the County of Barcelona became the Capital of the “Principality of Catalonia” which later became incorporated into the Kingdom of Aragon.  Aragon, in turn, was one of the most powerful and richest states in the post-Reconquista/Crusader world of the Mediterranean.  Then Aragon, later, under the 15th century reigns of King Ferdinand of Aragon and Queen Isabella of Castile, merged to form the modern Nation-State of “Spain”, leading to 500 years of almost continuous unity, although Aragon and Catalonia have several times reasserted their identities as monarchies or republics.

As James Ronald & Walter Donald Kennedy have shown in their most recent book “Punished with Poverty: the Suffering South, Prosperity to Poverty and the Continuing Struggle”  Columbia, South Carolina: Shotwell Publishing (2016), and as my dearly beloved grandmother always told me, THE SOUTH WAS THE WEALTHIEST PART OF THE UNITED STATES, “before the War” and the poorest part afterwards.   The combined cash value of the crops in any of the three pairs of Virginia and Georgia or Mississippi and Louisiana or North & South Carolina (each pair taken alone) exceeded the cash value of all the manufactured goods produced north of the Mason & Dixon-Ohio River—as of 1860.  But as of 1870, war had irreversibly altered the situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Shsf–rh4PE

While neither historians or any Southerners today doubt that the people of the South overwhelmingly favored secession in 1861, the state legislatures only voted to hold popular votes as referenda/plebiscites/”propositions” in three of the thirteen states and one territory seceding (there were fifteen “slave” states, but a secession vote in the legislature in Maryland was suppressed at gunpoint and the state of Delaware never tried—West Virginia seceded from Virginia but kept its slaves and (ironically) after the war was among the most hostile toward enfranchisement of the newly freed slaves, as evidenced in several of the early major civil rights cases which emerged from that idiosyncratic Appalachian state opposite Ohio that seceded to nullify secession—oh, and Arizona was a territory constituting the southern half of what is now Arizona and New Mexico, but had then all been “New Mexico” until 1861).

In the states that held popular vote referenda, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia, the votes in favor of secession were nowhere nearly as lopsided as the vote held in Catalonia today (Sunday, October 1, 2017), but it should be noted that NO NORTHERN STATE, nor the United States Federal Government, under President James Buchanan, ever questioned or attempted to quash secession in any state.  From South Carolina’s legislature’s first Ordinance of Secession on December 20, 1860, through Louisiana’s secession as the sixth state on January 26, 1861, the popular support for separation from the Union never appeared to waver or be doubtful.

SOUTHERN SECESSION PLEBESCITES

In February of 1861, Texas’ legislature voted to dissolve the state’s barely 16 year old affiliation with the Union on February 1, and a popular referendum was held on February 23, wherein the vote was 3.13:1 in favor of disunion.  

Virginia went through a similar two stage process in April and May of 1861, and the vote there (after Fort Sumter) was 3.53:1 in favor of taking the Old Dominion state into the Confederacy.  Robert E. Lee had opposed secession, but IN THOSE DAYS ONE’S CITIZENSHIP BELONGED TO THE STATE, NOT THE FEDERATION.  It would be comparable to calling us all “Citizens of the United Nations”—maybe some people WANT Global Citizenship, but so far, THANK GOD, no politically viable majority anywhere have ever voted for such a thing.

Finally, in May-June, Tennessee voted to secede, although the popular vote in that state was only 2.21:1 (for reference and comparison, NO PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS EVER WON ANY ELECTION BY A 2.21-1 POPULAR VOTE (although Lyndon B. Johnson came closest in 1964 against Goldwater at 1.58 to 1 comparable to FDR in 1936 against Alf Landon at 1.61 to 1—there being more third party votes in 1936 which reduced Roosevelt’s over all majority win very slightly).

IS FREEDOM TO CHOOSE REALLY TREASON?

How many of you have been divorced?  No, it’s a serious question.  How many of you have been divorced AFTER taking a vow “Til Death do Us Part”?  I was born an “Anglo-Catholic” (i.e. Episcopalian) and my wife was born Greek Orthodox in Greece.  My parents, despite their vows, split up when I was pre-school/kindergarten and it had a major impact on my life, mostly negative.  I especially regret now, looking back on it, how my grandmother taught me to scorn my own father.  That MIGHT have been a bad thing…  Anyhow, my point was this: my wife Elena and I swore personally to each other, quite aside from the marital vows, that we would never be divorced, that we would always stick together.  And we made collateral agreements that made I think this was actually a genuine promise that we would really keep, but we didn’t.  She hired the nastiest team of divorce lawyers (and their wives) in the entire state of Texas.  She turned into a monster.  Now, I blame the system, not her, but we split up, and it wrecked me.

But, in a sense, as one of my law school professors of international law at the University of Chicago said, “the nations of the world are all in a Roman Catholic marriage with one another.”  Or are they?  Are legal unions really indissoluble?  Most people do not believe that law should stand in the way of divorce, although most marital lawyers want divorce to be as much like an expensive world war as humanly possible.  So: is divorce “normal” or is divorce “treason?”

I have to admit, I led a fairly pro-Southern, sheltered life.  Even when I lived up north and attended Harvard GSAS (A.M., Ph.D.) and the University of Chicago law (J.D.) programs, I never ever heard ANYONE ever call the Southern Confederacy TREACHEROUS or the Southern Confederates called “Traitors”—as a matter of fact, everyone I knew at Harvard kind of went out of their way to apologize for Harvard’s apparent iconography of Yankee imperialism and to point out the rather obscure stained glass windows on Memorial Hall and inscriptions dedicated to the graduates of Harvard who fought for the South—(There were 257, significantly more than you might think, including five major generals, eight brigadier generals, and fully 38% of all Harvard Graduates who died in combat 1861-1865 died in the service of the armies the CSA, including three of those brigadier generals).  

So, I confess I was shocked, bowled over in fact, while I was standing in line at the very first public debate held in New Orleans on a steaming day in July in 2015 and an exceedingly unpleasant and unattractive woman in line started talking about how Confederates were all TRAITORS.

Wall Street JOURNAL MODERATE MUGWUMP: Allen C. Guelzo

“A YANKEE VISITS CHARLOTTESVILLE, WHERE GEN. LEE IS UNDER COVER.”

Some writers take poetic license, some take journalistic license.  But let’s face it: some writers DO NOT DESERVE A LICENSE.  Allen C. Guelzo is such a writer, and yet he writes for the Wall Street Journal…. and this is a disaster.  This USED TO BE a conservative, respectable journal***.   But no decent or respectable conservative would ever write that:

“As a Yankee, I find it a little difficult to grasp why monuments to Lee are here in the first place.  He lost, and if there is one sin American culture still prefers to bury from sight, it’s losing. Worse, Lee committed treason against the flag and the Constitution.  And behind that is the ugly truth that the Confederate cause was, when all the rhetorical chaff is swept away, designed to protect Chattel slavery, the singular birth defect of the American republic.” 

This is one of those sad moments when I have to admit I’m glad I’m not Chairman Mao or Uncle Joe Stalin…. because if I were, Guelzo would be TOAST—there wouldn’t be enough left of him to fill a matchbox, I promise.

UNLIKE THE SPANISH GOVERNMENT IN CATALONIA ON SUNDAY OCTOBER 1, 2017—NO POLICE OR TROOPS TRIED TO STOP THE SOUTHERN LEGISLATURES FROM SECEDING OR THE PRO-CONFEDERATE POPULAR VOTES FROM HAPPENING

So, if secession didn’t bother the outgoing President James Buchanan, or if it bothered him he didn’t do anything to stop it.  Buchanan was a Democrat, but he was a PENNSYLVANIA DEMOCRAT—a Yankee….the only Pennsylvanian ever to be elected President and the last President born in the 18th century.  

Buchanan supported his own Vice-President, John C. Breckinridge, in the election of 1860—Breckinridge being the choice of the “Southern Democrats” over Stephen Douglas of Illinois.  Breckinridge became a Confederate general—that’s right folks, the Vice-President of the United States who came in Second in the Electoral Vote and Third in the Popular Vote in 1860 became a Confederate General.  Was he a traitor too?  

I ask you (and Guelzo) somewhat rhetorically: IF the Vice-President of any country decides to take up arms agains that Country—don’t you suppose that there are some MAJOR issues at stake?  If James Buchanan believed that he had no constitutional power to stop secession, where did Abraham Lincoln get the idea that he had that power?

For the moment, I will leave that idea to you, but recommend to all my readers the words of James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy, but also of Von Mises Institute Economist Thomas James DiLorenzo.

But is it significant that England would surely have allowed Scotland to opt out of the UK if Scotland had voted to do so several years ago?  Is it significant that Spain is trying very hard to look like a bully as it tries to bully Catalonia into submission, but that the world will almost certainly accept Catalonian secession in fairly short order?

***The Wall Street Journal was a feature of life in and around my maternal grandparents’ home in Highland Park in Dallas from the time I went to live there at age 6 years, two months, until my grandmother’s death in May 2001.  I respected it as perhaps the best newspaper in all of North America—I even arranged to have the WSJ delivered to Hacienda Chichén (and later the adjacent Casa Victoria) when I lived there, and made it the headquarters of my Harvard-Peabody-National Geographic-Chichén Itzá Archaeological Project 1983-1988.  Arranging such things by courier delivery from the Aeropuerto Internacional de Cancún in the 1980s was no piece of cake.

 

Sovereign Nation or USA Vassal-State? German Looks to its Future under the Obamanation of Global-Imperialist USA!: More European Commentary on the Free Trade Agreement that NO ONE is Discussing in the USA—Obama Promotes Trayvon Sympathy Race-Riots to Hide the Largest U.S. Imperialist Action in HIstory—the Virtual Annexation of Europe

Last week for Bastille Day, July 14, 2013, I published a quotation from the French Front National’s website concerning the leading French Nationalist Party’s fears of a free trade agreement that, so far, I have seen discussed NOWHERE in the US-Media—someone fill me in if they have seen NYT or WSJ reports on it, because I’ve looked and (if they are there) I’ve somehow missed it.  We obviously can not count, any longer, on these two traditional pillars of US Journalism.  This week, following up on the French Commentary about the “Wildfire of Savage Globalism” with and by which Obama as George Bush’s handpicked successor is attempting effectively to annex Europe, I now quote the German National Democratic Party’s fears of the complete abrogation of National Sovereignty for status as a U.S. Vassal State, a condition not experienced since the dismal days post 1945 when Germany was effectively partitioned four ways between Great Britain in the Northwest (Hamburg, Hannover, Bremen, Schleswig-Holstein, Wesphalia, and most of Rheinland-Phalz, France in the Southwest (Saarland, Baden-Wurtemburg, U. S. Central and Southeast (Bavaria up to and including Frankfurt-am-Main), and of course, the entire eastern half of the Country either annexed to Poland and obliterated from the map or the heartland stub of Berlin, Brandenburg, Thuringia, Saxony, and Mecklenberg-Schwerin as “East Germany” operating under Russian occupation for 45 years as a Soviet Vassal State).  Surely Germany has suffered enough from foreign domination!

My sight-translation from German is not the best of my foreign language skills (German-original text below), but this is the best I can do early on a Sunday morning before Church with no better stimulus than Arizona Southern Style Tea from a page just published on Friday July 19, 2013, on the National Democratic Party websitehttp://www.npd.de/html/1938/artikel/detail/3310/ I WOULD WELCOME ANY CORRECTIONS OR SUGGESTED CLARIFICATIONS OF MY TRANSLATION BELOW, my undergraduate German professors Starke & Gotzkowsky would be so disappointed in my ability 36-35 years later…

Sovereign German Nation State or US-Vassal>
German Future Against the Background of the Prism-Accord Provided by the “Free Trade” Agreement with the United States

One simply has to answer too many questions incompletely and insubstantially, because we simply have no answer from the United States regarding to the extent of the American spying on German citizens and politicians. More than two-thirds of the Germans are dissatisfied and unhappy with the information provided by the (German) federal government, which may have been enough for Angela Merkel on this topic that shows her failings dramatically.
However, the NPD will not allow this affirmation of the comprehensive loss any sovereignty to evaporate into the summer heat.  Because it is not only the privacy of millions of Germans citizens by US-espionage that is in danger, even the protection of German companies is no longer secure.
Given this background, it is important to consider the proposed free trade agreement between the EU and the United States must be reviewed.  A  “free trade agreement” in any case threatens the independent self-management of all member governments and their peoples.  “Free Trade” prohibits ordinary national protection mechanisms, import duties and other effective measures for consumer protection. The “winners” of this free trade area are only the large, internationally active corporations. [Translators note: look at what has happened in Mexico since NAFTA: the Blessings of Walmart have reached into every corner of the land, including World Patrimony sites like the ruins of the greatest pre-Aztec sacred city of Quetzalcoatl at Teotihuacan; yet has Mexico reaped a great harvest of jobs amidst the Yankee invasion?  No, the slave labor of China and sub-human wages of sub-continental India have undercut Mexico’s extremely low wages, meaning that American companies have taken their jobs NOT to Mexico primarily but elsewhere, as Free Trade permits them to do—the net loss of Sovereignty plus Wealth to Mexico has fueled the largest human migration in history across the Rio Grande, Gadsen Purchase line, and boundary of Upper-Lower California to the point where the US is effectively half-Mexican now and large parts of the Mexican population depend on the “foreign aid” provided by its US-resident citizens].  “Losers” are without exception the acquiescing states and their citizens.  The states lose, because for every protective measure they can be dragged into [effectively dominant-State-US controlled] free trade courts, and this means that the states are thereby forced largely to withdraw from economic regulation. The people lose, because consumers suffer from unsafe products [produced in non-consumer countries] and small businesses suffer from the ruinous competition from abroad [which competition] could not be more effectively protected.

So said the US-american political scientist Susan George: “winners are logically the large companies. Small and medium-sized companies obtain much less, if they are already subcontractors of the greater companies and so already exploited, they have no way to regulate their prices, which will fall.”
Horse meat scandals and worse were on the agenda, because the states have no regulatory power anymore. Consumer protection becomes a thing of the past. The GMO Biotech-Concern Monsanto announced just a few days ago, that it will make no further applications for legalisation of genetically modified food in Germany and Europe.  This is no wonder, since Monsanto and similar companies can calmly but soon via free trade agreements will export  their genetically modified products to Germany [against the will and choice of the German people]. Ms. George states, precisely: “In the US, with 80 percent of the maize [American corn] production genetically modified, multinational companies dominate. And in agriculture, then the price on the US market sets the international price. That would be the ruin of the Europeans, except for the large, industrial establishments in Europe.”

The current Prism-Accord, is now revealed in light of the comprehensive espionage of the US secret NSA [National Security Agency] service in Germany, [and] shos the planned free trade agreement in [at the very least] a questionable light. In the future, comprehensive industrial espionage in Germany and Europe would be even easier for the US secret services. Several studies have already shown that Germany would have the least benefit of such a free trade agreement.  The even more comprehensive industrial espionage imposed on Germany, on the other hand would probably bear the brunt. Our already docile and US vassal Politi-Puppets like Chancellor Angela Merkel and Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich provide no expectation of protection for German citizens, consumers or businesses. [Friedrich has shown this by the complete lack of vigor in his investigation of the NSA over the past week or so].
Neither the Prism-Accord nor the planned free trade agreement will disappear in the summer!  They must be an election issue!
The NPD is the only party in Germany for the restoration of the full sovereignty of the German nation-state, the guarantor of the ability of German policies and basic conditions for an effective protection of German citizens and businesses.

[all bracketed content added by yours truly, the shamefully poor-translator CEL III]

(ORIGINAL TEXT IN GERMAN, SAME PAGE NOTED ABOVE: http://www.npd.de/html/1938/artikel/detail/3310/)

19.07.2013

Soveräner deutscher Nationalstaat statt US-Vasall

Vor dem Hintergrund von Prism darf es mit den USA kein Freihandelsabkommen geben 

Viele Fragen musste sie mit völliger Substanzlosigkeit beantworten, weil sie schlicht und ergreifend von den USA bisher keine Antwort zum Ausmaß der Ausspähung deutscher Bürger und Politiker bekommen hat. Mehr als zwei Drittel der Deutschen sind mit der Aufklärungsarbeit der Bundesregierung unzufrieden, Grund genug für Merkel, daß Thema zu entdramatisieren.

Die NPD wird allerdings nicht zulassen, daß dieser Beleg des umfassenden Verlusts jeglicher Souveränität im Sommerloch verschwindet. Denn nicht nur die Privatsphäre von Millionen deutschen Bürgern ist durch die US-Spionage in Gefahr, auch der Schutz deutscher Unternehmen ist nicht mehr gewährleistet.

Vor diesem Hintergrund muß auch das geplante Freihandelsabkommen zwischen der EU und den USA betrachtet werden. Ein Freihandelsabkommen bedroht ohnehin die Handlungsfähigkeit der Staaten und Völker, verbietet es doch nationale Schutzmechanismen, Einfuhrzölle und wirksame Maßnahmen zum Verbraucherschutz. Gewinner einer solchen Freihandelszone wären einzig und allein die großen, international agierenden Konzerne. Verlierer wären die Staaten und deren Bürger. Erstere, weil sie wegen jeder Schutzmaßnahme vor Gericht gezerrt werden könnten, da der Freihandelsvertrag die Staaten zwingen würde, sich aus der Wirtschaftsregulierung weitgehend zurückzuziehen. Letztere, weil Verbraucher vor bedenklichen Produkten und kleine Unternehmen vor der ruinösen Konkurrenz aus dem Ausland nicht mehr wirksam geschützt werden könnten.

So sagte hierzu die US-amerikanische Politikwissenschaftlerin Susan George: „Gewinner sind logischerweise die großen Unternehmen. Kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen würden viel weniger davon haben, wenn sie Subunternehmer sind und bereits von den Großen ausgebeutet werden, die nicht regelmäßig zahlen, die die Preise drücken können.“

Pferdefleischskandale und Schlimmeres wären an der Tagesordnung, weil die Staaten über keinerlei Kontrollbefugnisse mehr verfügen würden. Verbraucherschutz würde der Vergangenheit angehören. Der Gentech-Konzern Monsanto hat erst vor wenigen Tagen bekannt gegeben, keine weiteren Anträge auf Legalisierung von genmanipulierten Lebensmitteln in Deutschland und Europa stellen zu wollen. Dies ist auch kein Wunder, können Monsanto und ähnliche Konzerne doch bald seelenruhig ihren Genmüll via Freihandelsabkommen nach Deutschland exportieren. George hierzu wörtlich: „In den USA macht Genmais 80 Prozent der Produktion aus, hier dominieren multinationale Unternehmen. Und in der Landwirtschaft, wird dann der Preis auf dem US-Markt zum internationalen Preis. Das wäre der Ruin der Europäer, außer für die großen, industriellen Betriebe in Europa.“

Auch die aktuelle Prism-Affäre, die die umfassende Spionage des US-Geheimdienstes NSA in Deutschland offengelegt hat, stellt das geplante Freihandelsabkommen in ein fragwürdiges Licht. Künftig wäre es für die US-Geheimdienste noch einfacher, umfassende Industriespionage in Deutschland und Europa zu betreiben. Mehrere Studien haben bereits ergeben, daß Deutschland von einem solchen Freihandelsabkommen ohnehin am wenigsten profitieren würde. Die noch umfassendere Industriespionage eingerechnet wäre Deutschland hingegen wohl sogar der Hauptleidtragende. Mit willfährigen und US-hörigen Polit-Marionetten wie Merkel und Friedrich ist auch kein Schutz deutscher Bürger, Verbraucher und Unternehmen zu erwarten.

Sowohl die Prism-Affäre als auch das geplante Freihandelsabkommen dürfen nicht im Sommerloch verschwinden! Sie müssen Wahlkampfthema werden!

Die NPD spricht sich als einzige Partei in Deutschland für die Wiederherstellung der umfassenden Souveränität des deutschen Nationalstaats aus, die Garant für die Handlungsfähigkeit der deutschen Politik und Grundbedingung für einen wirksamen Schutz deutscher Bürger und Unternehmen ist.

Reporting in from a hillside in Maui, Hawaii—looking at an ocean, beautiful and still…..

http://www.freehawaii.org

One especially interesting aspect of Modern Hawaiian secessionism is that it did not just surge to the forefront because of 4150 some odd signatures on the Whitehouse Petition site.

The Hawaiian secessionist movement is in fact taken terribly seriously, as a political, racial, economic, and socio-cultural issue, even if it is not talked about too much.  Hawaiian Secessionism has been receiving attention for the past 20 years, since the Clinton administration issued an official “apology” for the wrongful annexation of Hawaii.  http://www.hawaii-nation.org/congrec-house.html.   See also: http://www.hawaiiankingdom.org/apology.shtml

This attention has been expressed in both Washington and Honolulu and even in New York City, or at least on the “conservative” (i.e. pro-corporate) pages of the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704188104575083843429621442.html

In the Wall Street Journal, and on other sites, it is apparent that Hawaii’s multi-racial paradise in the tropics, which gave us the multi-racial/mixed race Presidency of Barack Obama, suffers from festering racial wounds.  Whether he was born in Mombasa, Kenya, as Lucas D. Smith has shown is most likely, or in Honolulu, as the so-called 44th President claims (even after his supposedly legitimate re-election would seem to moot the question forever except as a historical exercise), Barack Obama supposedly represents simultaneously the retreat of colonialism and the end of racism—at least of white racism.  But anti-white racism seems to be allowed and actually encouraged.

Part of the purpose of my visit to Hawaii now in the late Autumn of 2012 is to educate myself about the tropical polyglot multi-racial society in Hawaii.   I am told the Courts on this island are “conservative”, but by that I understand to mean that the children of Plantation workers favor the Corporate life and Corporate ownership of property against the individual…. i.e. “Conservatism” may mean something more like “Communism” here…. We shall see.  But Hawaii is definitely the only place with more ostensible “racial diversity” than even Los Angeles, and the most governmental control over land use and distribution of any state in the Union….. We all do need to understand this….. what is the correlation between multi-racial society, corporate ownership, and communistic tendencies in government…..    But in any case:

How terribly ironic that Hawaii, the only state of the United States ever to have had an established presence within the community of nations besides Texas, much more durable than the “Republic of West Florida” or even the easily remembered (because of the State Flag) “Bear Flag Republic of California”, has only garnered 4,150 signatures as of 11:27PM after my arrival at Kahului airport on Monday, November 26, 2012.  Not only does Hawaii have a more active secessionist movement than any other state including Texas, but this movement was only just recently received attention, if not exactly “celebrated” in the popular media by a “not so favorable” mention in Dinesh D’Souza’s Obama 2016).   Yet still, Hawaiians are not signing on at the White House Petition site: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-hawaii-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/kfvFZyfw.

One problem appears to be that secessionism may not be wildly popular in the 50th state.  See, e.g.: http://www.hawaiireporter.com/hawaii-legislatures-secessionist-resolution-is-ridiculous-and-dangerous/123

While secessionist fever has gathered over 117,000 signatures in my native Texas and over 37,000 in my grandmother’s native Louisiana, Hawaii has gathered separationist signatures on the level of Maine, Maryland, and Massachusetts—New Mexico with 5,155 and Nebraska with 7,284 have outbid Hawaii all together.

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Peacefully grant the State of Hawaii to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to dissolve political bands which have connected them, the separate and equal station to which Laws of Nature and God entitle them, respect requires they should declare the causes which impel them to separate.

Governments instituted derive their just powers from consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to abolish and institute new Government.

Whereas, people of Hawaii recognize America guilty of unlawful occupation and request peaceful solution being of sound resonance to secede from said union of America, to build a government that better suits inhabitants of Hawaii with alliance to the United States of America.

Created: Nov 12, 2012

SIGNATURES NEEDED BY DECEMBER 12, 2012 TO REACH GOAL OF 25,000

20,850

TOTAL SIGNATURES ON THIS PETITION

4,150

You’ve already signed this petition