Increasing Number of States Declaring Sovereignty

[m42]

Back in December, the Wall Street Journal had a good chuckle over Russian academic Igor Panarin’s prediction that the United States would break apart by 2010. Using threadbare Cold War logic, Andrew Osborn wrote that Panarin’s forecast “is music to the ears of the Kremlin, which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis.” For the WSL scribe, Panarin’s analysis is about the Red Bear “returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories.”

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were nullified many years ago, at least since the emergence of the Federalists under Alexander Hamilton.
In fact, it was not so much “weakness” that destroyed Russia as it was....

http://www.congresscheck.com/2009/02/05/increasing-number-of-states-declaring-sovereignty/

Props to Jerry.

[kerrin]

*applause*

Jeffersonian principles still inspire!

Wish I could declair my own sovereignty. ;)

[m42]

You can! You'd just need to acquire an "unclaimed" island in international waters. The general rule is at least 12 nautical miles off the coast of pretty much every country. There are, of course, many exceptions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters)! ;)

[Brieme]

2-party states are not the ideal situation.

Much better than 1-party states though, I find.

[Tom Palven]

Fire baaad! States baaad! Individual sovereignty, beer, goood!

[Tom Palven]

Phihilosophers L. A. Rollins (The Myth of Natural Rights) and George H. Smith (Atheism: The Case Against God) found that a philosophical case for individual sovereignty goes back at least as far as John Locke in 1690 in The Second Treatise on Government where he said "...no body can transfer to another more power than he has in himself." Slightly later, in 1698 in Discourses Concerning Government , Algernon Sidney said "This will be evident to all who consider, that no man can confer upon others that which he has not in himself.". And still later, in a letter to Thomas Bayard in 1882, anarchist/abolitionist Lysander Spooner stated "No man can delegate, or give to another, any right of arbitrary dominion over a third person..."
Followed to it's logical conclusion this concept would endorse anarchism-- the end of big government and the US Empire. If this concept is both logical and ethical, which no one has yet refuted, lets bring it on.