Plan For Freedom

by Timothy Baldwin
April 22, 2010

In a recent article, radio talk-show host, columnist for the Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute, Jeffrey Kuhner, asks the question, “Will America break up?”[1] Kuhner is not the only intelligent and reasonable person asking this question and predicting its reality. Igor Panarin, a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian foreign affairs ministry, predicts that given the way the federal government handles its finances and given the unrecoverable deficit of the U.S., the U.S. is undoubtedly bound for “extinction in its present form,”[2] not even mentioning the political, cultural, religious, moral and foreign-entanglement turmoil of the U.S.

The question is rightfully being asked more, and as such, the question should be defined and understood more precisely and constructively so that people are aware of what “breakup of America” really means.

First, by “America,” we mean the United States of America comprised of fifty states under the political association of the U.S. Constitution.

Second, by “breakup,” we must determine if this is meant to be a negative or positive action. “Breakup” could mean collapse, destroyed, annihilated, etc., all of which would be construed negatively and thus rejected in theory by the readers. However, “breakup” could also mean independent, separate, sovereign etc., all of which could be construed in a positive fashion and thus accepted in theory by the readers. Perspective is determinative here.

Third, we must determine if the question refers to the people of the states in their individual capacities as bodies-politic; the state governments as agents of the people under their state constitutions; and/or the federal government as created by the states under the U.S. Constitution.

When one analyzes the foundations of society and government in the United States, the conclusion that the U.S. will “breakup” should not be surprising, considering the cycles of human history and experience, not to mention the study of political science. Thus, the question should be raised, “should the states breakup/secede/separate from the federal government as formed under the U.S. Constitution, and if so, in what manner?”

For better or worse, many in the United States have literally idolized the union of the United States, as formed under the U.S. Constitution from 1787 to 1791, during which time thirteen states ratified the constitution separately and independently of each other. Suggesting that the United States “breakup” leaves a sense of shock in their minds and hearts, for they cannot imagine a life without a union of fifty states under the power and control of the federal government. (The reasons for this are not subject to this discussion.)

That the United States procured its sovereign and independent political and societal existence through secession from Great Britain–a breakup of its own–does not seem to enter into their minds concerning a “breakup” of the United States in its current form. Some seem to think that if the union “as is” goes, so goes freedom, although history has proven otherwise. People with this mindset automatically conclude that “breakup” will be perpetually and everlastingly detrimental to freedom and that union as is must be preserved at all costs.

“Is it because you do not believe that an American can be a tyrant? If this be the case you rest on a weak basis; Americans are like other men in similar situations…[and] your posterity will find that great power connected with ambition, luxury, and flattery, will as readily produce a Caesar, Caligula, Nero, and Domitian in America, as the same causes did in the Roman empire.”[3]

However, many in America adamantly believe that the freedom and ideals fought for in 1776 have been all but completely attacked and killed under oppressive control of the federal government and the demoralization of society throughout the states over the past many generations–all the constitutions in America notwithstanding. They cannot reasonably foresee a restoration of freedom in their state through the political process in Washington D.C. under the current union, regardless of which political party controls the federal government.

Others are caught between two worlds that they either do not want or do not understand.

So, can the states in America be more proactive in their planning to restore freedom? Or should they wear their Kevlar helmets just waiting for the inevitable collapse and then attempt to “rise from the ashes” during the chaos and God knows what else?

America’s founding generation believed that a proactive approach to an obviously tyrannous government (despite the existence of the greatest and freest constitution in the world at that time) was necessary to preserve their freedom. They did not wait for the ashes and ruins to fall upon them through the natural consequences of ill-administered government. Instead, they used the tools of hindsight, insight and foresight to calculate the measure of their survival and freedom. In that case, independence was necessary.

A body of people gathered together to govern themselves (i.e. a body-politic/state) have a natural right to preserve, protect, perpetuate and perfect their existence. They are not morally, constitutionally or ethically obligated to severely suffer more than if they had not entered into that particular society or that government in the first place. They have the power to govern themselves according to the principles derived from the very purpose of society and government.

The states are not obligated to wait until the hammer falls upon them, their families, communities, businesses and property before they have a right to act accordingly, just as a husband does not have to wait for another man to actually rape his wife before he terminates the would-be rapist when the threat is apparent to the husband and wife.

In fact, societies that wait too late rarely have the opportunity to restore freedom without immense pain and suffering: they are mostly oppressed to the point of voluntary submission to slavery. John Locke observes as well that self-government must happen sooner, rather than later: a preventative measure, not a reactionary measure:

“This is in effect no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their liberty; and when their chains are on, tell them, they may act like freemen. This, if barely so, is rather mockery than relief; and men can never be secure from tyranny, if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it: and therefore it is, that they have not only a right to get out of it, but to prevent it.”[4]

Therefore, when that State sees the danger approaching or it recognizes its own enslaving conditions, it has every right to judge the situation as it discerns and to act accordingly. These are the principles expounded by our founders in the Declaration of Independence, and these are the ideas expressed by western-world jurists before 1776, which equipped our founders for the penning and signing of the Declaration of Independence. In essence, the thirteen colonies prevented the inevitable collapse of freedom, security and happiness by preemptively eliminating the source of their demise: their “central government” in Great Britain. Reconciliation would have been nice, perhaps; but freedom was nicer.

Ultimately, where there are two competing fundamental notions of governance, one must prevail and the other must fail. In a country as large and vast as the United States has become, this is very problematic when considering the fundamental maxims of freedom expressed in the Declaration of Independence: the larger the territory and number of people, the less likely a republic will remain free. This was recognized by jurists and philosophers for hundreds of years before 1776: “It is natural to a republic to have only a small territory, otherwise it cannot long subsist.”[5]

Kuhner expresses the conflict this way: “We are no longer one nation or one people. Rather, there are now two Americas: one conservative, the other liberal. Increasingly, we no longer just disagree but we despise each other.”[6] In such an environment, freedom within a large union never remains. The consent of the governed becomes oppressed by those who do not share their values, beliefs and morals. The union is held together not from the voluntary bonds of likeness, similarity, loyalty and friendship, but from brute force.

Human nature and experience prove that as a body of people or states regard their God-given freedom and rights as stolen or trampled and as “peaceful” political process effects no restoration of those freedoms and rights for generations, “breakup” is not only inevitable, it is necessary. America’s founders believed the same: “[I]n the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands.”[7]

Do not be deceived into thinking that this necessity will not occur, is impractical or is foolish. The course of events in the United States has proven one thing: the federal government is out of control and has been for generations. Freedom is always a worthy goal, even when the chances do not humanly appear favorable. There were many throughout the colonies in 1776 that saw no hope in the breakup from Great Britain; but to their surprise, the breakup was successful.

Moreover, despite that the colonies appeared to be wholly inadequate to backup their breakup from Great Britain, their secession produced the freest and most successful country the world had ever known. Those who advocated for reconciliation with Great Britain were terribly wrong and would have only perpetuated what was destroying the security, happiness and freedom of the colonies.

We the People of the States should not simple-mindedly and passively wait for a “collapse” of the U.S., as if our existence consists of nothing more than being cattle, wondering if we are going to the slaughter today or tomorrow. Instead, the States should proactively plan, engage and prepare in the political understanding, knowledge and truth that make people free, just as America’s forefathers did. In the end, free people are only those who plan for freedom.

© 2010 Timothy N. Baldwin, JD – All Rights Reserved


[1] Jeffrey Kuhner, “Will America Break Up?”, Right Bias, (March 25, 2010), found at http://rightbias.com/news/kuhner42.aspx

[2] Tom Leonard, US will collapse and break up, Russian analyst predicts, Telegraph.co.uk, (November 25, 2008), found at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3521671/US-will-collapse-and-break-up-Russian-analyst-predicts.html

[3] Brutus and Ralph Ketcham, ed., The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates, (New York: Signet Classic, 2003), 319.

[4] John Locke and C. B. Macpherson, ed., Second Treatise of Government, (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1980), 110–111, (emphasis added).

[5] Charles de Baron Montesquieu and Julian Hawthorne, ed., The Spirit of Laws: The World’s Great Classics, vol. 1 (London: The London Press), 120.

[6] Jeffrey Kuhner, “Will America Break Up?”, Right Bias, (March 25, 2010), found at http://rightbias.com/news/kuhner42.aspx

[7] Declaration of Independence (emphasis added).

Sphere: Related Content

Print
, , , ,

This post was written by:

Timothy_Baldwin - who has written 128 posts on Liberty Defense League.

Timothy Baldwin is a Florida and Montana attorney who received his B.A. degree at the University of West Florida and graduated from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham, AL. After having received his Juris Doctorate degree from Cumberland, Baldwin became a Felony Prosecutor in the 1st District of Florida. In 2006, he started his own law practice, where he created specialized legal services entirely for property management companies. Baldwin is a prolific writer/columnist and writes for numerous publications, including The New American magazine. Baldwin is also an articulate speaker relevant to freedom’s issues. Baldwin is an author of legal and political articles, as well as his latest book, Freedom For A Change (published by Agrapha Publishing). Baldwin has a working manuscript on Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission and expects to publish this book soon. Baldwin is involved in important state sovereignty movement issues, including the federal litigation in Montana involving the Firearms Freedom Act.

Contact the author

25 Responses to “Plan For Freedom”

  1. Keith Doyon Says:

    What might underlie how something like such a break-up might come about? May I recommend an interesting (and short) read apparently published in The Guardian a few days ago posted here: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/04/20/an-eruption-of-reality/
    While it deals with the interruption of global inter-connectedness following the Eyjafjallajoekull volcano eruption, it goes a lot deeper. Specifically quoting complexity theorist Joe Tainter.

    One excellent example of his writing is a paper available here: https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/users/jastallins/public_htm/courses/complexity/readings/Tainter.pdf

    Here’s the deal: Societies are problem-solving engines. That’s why we have societies. And societies (e.g., “America”) get complex as a way to solve societies’ complex problems. Increasingly complex problems require increasingly complex solutions/societies. Except that there is always “friction,” that is, there is cost associated with complexity, and the cost of maintaining the administration of a complex society usually increases faster than the complexification (and concomitant benefits). Eventually, the cost, the “overhead” of just simply maintaining the structure of the society is so burdensome that it becomes more “cost-effective” (that is, “worth it”) to simply allow the overhead of the society to dissolve, and for the society to become simpler again.
    Remember: When the Western Roman Empire “collapsed” in the 5th Century AD, the peasants didn’t just disappear. They were still there farming the same lands. They were simply no longer taxed by the Roman Administration. For most of western Europe peasantry, their lives got BETTER as a result of the collapse, not worse.

    When I was young, America really did have an air about it that it couldn’t happen here. I don’t actually know anyone anymore that deeply feels that way. Everyone is out of the denial stage, spread across the other 4 Kübler-Ross stages. I like the idea of actively preparing.

    Keith

  2. Ross Echtermeyer Says:

    I have to say that I agree with Mr Baldwin, the article makes painful sense, the facts as stated speak for themselves. A peaceful, bloodless break up of the US would probably not happen, however it would for sure surprise many people if possible. Imagine just being able to move to the governed area of your choice, homesteading and becoming a citizen of that area, accepting it’s rules, regulations and commerce with it’s own standing Army. This would probably not work either, as greed rules and other stronger states or entities would invade and overcome the weaker ones. No! A breakup would be a severe change in government as we know it, bringing either more restrictions, lawlessness or total oppression! to insure that future generations will accept the NWO and it’s laws without question or perish.

  3. NANCY Says:

    MR. BALDWIN: WHAT ARE SOME FEASIBLE PLANS FOR FORMING A FREE ENTITY?

  4. Expy Says:

    Chuck:

    Well said. There can be little doubt that the breakup is coming sooner rather than later. The health care bill alone ensures national bankruptcy and imposes on the states an obligation to confiscate the wealth of their citizens to try and meet the cost – which of course, will not be met, and rationing will ensue.

    The operative questions are: In what geographic region will a new republic emerge? Who will its members be? How will they accomplish their emergence as a free republic?

    I, for one, have no doubt that a Godly-ordained republic will emerge from the failure of this monolith, and will succeed while its liberal periphery fades into medievalism, bearing in mind that “unless the Lord builds the house, the workman labor in vain.”

  5. Kevin Says:

    All I can say is “WOW!” You almost make me believe freedom is still possible. Well written. God bless you.

  6. Timothy_Baldwin Says:

    Kevin,

    Thank you. Freedom is always possible when men seek to understand God’s will on earth.

  7. Timothy_Baldwin Says:

    Expy,

    Thank you for your comments…one correct, the author is TIM Baldwin, not Chuck. go to http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com for Chuck’s website.

  8. Mike Says:

    Tim

    Thank you for this article and for your other writings. You do indeed have a way with words and a large degree of common sense. I appreciate your articulating the way things are in an encouraging way. I am privy to an economic plan with a constitutional solution via the legislative approach for the States to take. I will be willing to share more fully when some State legislators are willing to stand up an be counted. Here is a link to a hint in the direction of what may be done. Please see the open letter–

    http://www.nevadafullstatehood.com/jun182003.htm

  9. Mike Says:

    The other approach (the non political one) to take was outlined in the writings of E.C. Riegel over 50 years ago.

    http://www.newapproachtofreedom.info/naf/chapter3.html

  10. Bill Says:

    Let them eat taxes!
    Is there an email alert I can subscribe to? I can be packed in less than a day.

    Seriously, I’m sick of people that are too stupefied to learn from history and too ignorant to give a damn about what the hell’s been going on in Washington DC. I want to be as far away from the people that rallied in Illinois–screaming for higher taxes–as I can get.

    I’ll move back out West again if we can draw a line in the dirt somewhere around Denver, declare independence, open carry and brew our own whiskey–I’ll miss you Jack Daniels!

  11. Saoirse Says:

    It will happen and is already in progress,witness states claiming the 10th amendment ,lawsuits against “hellcare”,etc.

    go to the prudent places where people respect and understand the United States Constitutional rights,liberty,freedom,responsibilty and accountabilty.
    basically cancels out the north east where there are still good people BUT extremely poor leadershp.

  12. Mike Says:

    If we are to “plan for freedom” we must realize it is the money system that is enslaving us. Having done this we must begin to create our own money so as to liberate the exchange process. You may study the history and possibilities at

    http://www.reinventingmoney.com

  13. Patrick Says:

    MR. BALDWIN: WHAT ARE SOME FEASIBLE PLANS FOR FORMING A FREE ENTITY?

  14. Adam Says:

    It will happen and is already in progress,witness states claiming the 10th amendment ,lawsuits against “hellcare”,etc.

    go to the prudent places where people respect and understand the United States Constitutional rights,liberty,freedom,responsibilty and accountabilty.
    basically cancels out the north east where there are still good people BUT extremely poor leadershp.

  15. Dave Says:

    If we are to “plan for freedom” we must realize it is the money system that is enslaving us. Having done this we must begin to create our own money so as to liberate the exchange process. You may study the history and possibilities at

    http://www.reinventingmoney.com

  16. Dennis Says:

    I have to say that I agree with Mr Baldwin, the article makes painful sense, the facts as stated speak for themselves. A peaceful, bloodless break up of the US would probably not happen, however it would for sure surprise many people if possible. Imagine just being able to move to the governed area of your choice, homesteading and becoming a citizen of that area, accepting it’s rules, regulations and commerce with it’s own standing Army. This would probably not work either, as greed rules and other stronger states or entities would invade and overcome the weaker ones. No! A breakup would be a severe change in government as we know it, bringing either more restrictions, lawlessness or total oppression! to insure that future generations will accept the NWO and it’s laws without question or perish.

  17. Ian Says:

    I have to say that I agree with Mr Baldwin, the article makes painful sense, the facts as stated speak for themselves. A peaceful, bloodless break up of the US would probably not happen, however it would for sure surprise many people if possible. Imagine just being able to move to the governed area of your choice, homesteading and becoming a citizen of that area, accepting it’s rules, regulations and commerce with it’s own standing Army. This would probably not work either, as greed rules and other stronger states or entities would invade and overcome the weaker ones. No! A breakup would be a severe change in government as we know it, bringing either more restrictions, lawlessness or total oppression! to insure that future generations will accept the NWO and it’s laws without question or perish.

  18. Mark Are Says:

    I’ve decided a number of years ago to do this…
    don’t even try to understand, just find a place and make your stand and take it easy.

    I will NOT move again. Four times in on lifetime is enough.

    And btw…this article explains a major connection to the problem…

    BEWARE THE PSYCHOPATHS MY SON…
    http://carolynbaker.net/site/content/view/485/

  19. bert sargent Says:

    repeat,wishing and waiting for a miracle to return to a constitutional republic and have peace in the us is not going to happen until we the people do it. it will not be easy but those in dc need to be held accountable for their deeds. state funerals can be furnished. the 3 branches of gov are corrupted and will not change. b.sargent,western colorado

  20. standup4freedom Says:

    An Audience Initiated Drive to Get Alex Jones’ Infowars on More Talk Radio Stations Worldwide

    This would accomplish two things:

    o broaden the listener base by grabbing or attracting the attention of more souls showing them what’s REALLY going on.

    o bring in more money to the InfoWars coffers to strengthen the fight for freedom against the New World Order (NWO) and it’s police state. After all, who wants to live in a prison planet anyway?

    So what do you think? Would you like to help? Good, I’ve tried to make it easy for you so your time will be the most productive possible. Just follow these simple instructions:

    http://www.helpalexjones.tk

  21. Pathenry Says:

    For another thing that can be done in state legislatures, see (and sign!) http://www.manhattandeclaration.org. A few weeks ago pastors in Kentucky presented it their legislature. It passed!, sponsored by 45 members and adopted by voice vote. (www.manhattandeclaration.org/pdfs/KY-bill.pdf) Just imagine what might happen to our politics and culture if state legislatures across the country were to copy what Kentucky has done. Can you urge your legislators to do so?

  22. Jon Roland Says:

    The best way to overcome federal usurpation, given that the courts are not affording remedies for constitutional violations, is organized civil disobedience, especially if done at the level and with the leadership of states. A proposal for this is to be found at http://constitution.org/reform/us/tx/nullification/nullcomm.htm . The key components are:

    1. Commission. Establish a “Federal Action Review Commission” — a special commission with grand jury powers to meet continuously with rotating membership drawn from a pool of legal historians and constitutional scholars, appointed by the Governor, Attorney General, or Legislative Council; empowered to review the constitutionality of congressional legislation, or federal regulations or decisions, and if it finds such legislation, regulations, or decisions to be unconstitutional, to issue an edict, with the force of law, requiring that no state or local officials, employees, or contractors cooperate in the enforcement of it, and urging state citizens to refuse to cooperate. This Commission would be established by an amendment to the Texas Constitution.

    2. Structure and procedure. The Commission shall consist of 23 members, who shall serve for staggered terms of 4-8 months, drawn at random from a pool of at least 230 constitutional scholars and legal historians, who shall meet for at least one hour once a week, with a quorum of 16, and a vote of 12 required to issue an edict, based on a presumption of nonauthority of federal officials and agents and requiring strict proof of constitutionality from deductive logic and historical evidence. It shall be open to direct complaints of the unconstitutionality of federal actions from any citizen. It shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, and its deliberations shall be secret, except that it may disclose anything in its presentments. It may authorize criminal prosecution by issuing an indictment to any person, not necessarily a lawyer, upon a finding that the court cited has jurisdiction and that evidence of guilt is sufficient for trial.

    3. Penalties. State and local officials, employees, and contractors shall be duly notified in writing of such edicts within ten days and shall have twenty days to comply or be subject to termination after one written warning and a second failure to refuse to cooperate with federal officials and agents. No official, employee, or contractor shall be penalized for compliance with the edict.

    4. Funding. Establish a state fund to pay for private legal counsel and provide financial support of state citizens and officials who refuse to cooperate with unconstitutional federal statutes, regulations, or decisions, with the intention to obtain judicial decisions that support the unconstitutionality of the federal actions.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Plan For Freedom « Secession and Nullification — News & Information - 23. Apr, 2010

    [...] For Freedom Posted on April 23, 2010 by Bill Miller This article by Timothy Baldwin on LibertyDefenseLeague.com. We the People of the States should not simple-mindedly and passively wait for a “collapse” of [...]

  2. Free American Underground - Free American Underground - 23. Apr, 2010

    [...] [...]

  3. Plan For Freedom - 24. Apr, 2010

    [...] Baldwin lays it all out for us (h/t: Secession News) on why we need to get organized and get moving towards the goal of secession. [...]

Leave a Reply