The Secessionist Convergence Triad

One of the most profound statements to come out of the 2007 Second North American Secessionist Convention held in Chattanooga, as reported by Bill Poovey, was that the movement represented the unlikely partnering of “the far left and far right of American politics coming together.” The statement went largely unnoticed; however, it is the philosophical core of the proposed North American Secessionist Congress.

Of the many political illusions that are currently being shattered by the decline of industrial civilization (the collapse of the American Empire is a sub-collapse), two of the most important are the shattering of the two-party system and the shattering of the political notions of “left” and “right.” The symbolic emperor literally wears no clothes!

The political notions of “left” and “right” are in process of being denuded; they still hold significant sway in the public consciousness. Until such time as the two hemispheres converge and, in the process shatter pre-existing molds, the dynamic of far left and far right coming together retains its hold in the public psyche.

It has been proposed that the three political demographics encompassing the secessionist convergence triad are the States’ Rights movement, the Peak Oil movement, and disenchanted Greens. Each demographic recognizes, to one extent or another, the common denominator of secession.

The States’ Rights movement flirts with secession, up to and including the insertion of secession trigger clauses in resolutions. The Peak Oil movement acknowledges institutional collapse and devolution, while still weakly maintaining that such institutional collapse, i.e. secession, does not apply to the social institution of the large industrial nation state. Disenchanted Greens acknowledge the primacy of bioregional, secessionist politics in the face of bastardized federal parties. Within each demographic there reside minority cadres who will perceive the secessionist common denominator and political logic as put forward by the proposed North American Secessionist Congress.

For sake of argument, the convergence may roughly constitute the following breakdown: States’ Rights advocates (political right, 50% of convergence total); Peak Oilers (political left, 30% of convergence total); disenchanted Greens (political left, 20% of convergence total).

So there we have the unlikely partnering of “the far left and far right of American politics coming together.” The historical condition always dictates what can and cannot be done. The trick is to perceive the condition for what it is, without resorting to subjective and jingoistic security blankets, and act accordingly.



  1. After rereading this article, I am wondering whether you are exaggerating the significance of the Green movement (and consequently, that of “disenchanted Greens”), at least in American politics. The Green party never really caught on in the United States, probably because the Democratic Party is willing to do a fair amount of heavy lifting for environmental causes.

    However, one factor that you have not addressed is that of gun ownership. The National Rifle Association and similar groups have been the force behind the nullification statutes in Idaho and Montana respecting intrastate commerce in firearms. A similar bill is about to be introduced here in Ohio, and it is likely to command bipartisan support.

    Some Ohioans in the liberty movement are beginning to think in terms of a different triad, which we call “state sovereignty”, “gun sovereignty”, and “money sovereignty”.

    State sovereignty, of course, refers to the resolutions that have now been introduced in 36 States to assert the rights of States under the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which is documented in The Ohio Republic. Money sovereignty is reflected in movements to create State-owned banks outside the Federal Reserve system, similar to the Bank of North Dakota; and the “Honest Money” initiative, which seeks to reintroduce specie (gold and silver) payments for taxes.

    These three forms of sovereignty currently appeal primarily to the right, although “gun sovereignty” in several States, including Ohio, attracts considerable support from the left (contrary to a popular assumption). I do not think there is yet much public awareness of Peak Oil or bioregionalism, at least in Ohio.

    It may be that the drivers for secessionism vary by region, with your analysis more accurately reflecting the situation in Canada, New England, and the Pacific Northwest; and mine more accurately reflecting the situation in Ohio and in the South.

  2. Harold:

    I don’t think I am exagerating the “Green movement.” It is out there and, with any luck, still is home to some bioregional purists. Don’t forget that for each of the three demographics, what is being targeted is merely a sliver of support within each. The number of latent secessionists within the Greens is probably relative and equal to the number of latent secessionists within the States’ Rights movement…and the Peak Oil movement. The “slivers” of support, to my mind, represent the overlap within each outlook that recognizes (strongly or weakly as the case may be) secession, i.e. bioregionalism (Green), trigger clauses (States’ Rights), societal collapse (Peak Oilers).

    Where I might be exagerating is believing that some will come over from all three. As Thomas Naylor has said, it’s a tough sell. The crisis has a ways to go before “the pitch” becomes any easier. Of all psychological sacred cows, one’s national identity has got to be one of the toughest to crack.

    Here’s one back at ya: might we be “exagerating” the existence of a secessionist movement?

  3. As nearly as I can tell, there is no real secessionist movement anywhere in North America. There are a few people here and there — some are micronationalists, some nut cases, some serious but without much support, and a few little organizations like the League of the South and Second Vermont Republic; but no real grass-roots movembet toward secession.

    This could change, since public opinion has moved fairly rapidly in our favor (still only a tiny minority, but a much larger tiny minority, compared to six months ago). I sense it here in Ohio. People other than myself have been calling for flying just the Ohio (not the U.S.) flag on Flag Day (June 14), for creating an Ohio-based sovereignty (possibly turning into a code word for secessionist) think tank, for taking the first steps toward thinking like an independent nation. When the topic of secession comes up now, not everyone is laughing. Some are scared, some are hostile, the great majority think it can’t work, but people aren’t laughing. This is progress. The real hostilities will begin soon. After that, we’ll have to see whether there is enough support to weather the suppression.

  4. Re “As nearly as I can tell, there is no real secessionist movement anywhere in North America.”

    When discussing within the context of North American secession, I don’t know why Quebec is such a blindspot for Americans. Well, I do have an opinion, but I’ll keep that one tucked away. Electoral support remains at 35-40 percent, and the Bloc Quebecois always grabs its usual 45-50 seats at the federal parliamentary table (308 seats).

    The LoS has itself outlined a 10-year program for implementation of cultural identity prior to shifting to political organization. IMO, the socio-economic drivers of Post-Peak Oil will trump that timeline.

    As recently as the 1920’s (on a historical plane that is recent), here in the Maritimes many Nova Scotians flew the Nova Scotia flag at half mast on Dominion Day. The manner in which the Maritimes were brought into Confederation and the negative results of, have over the years been wiped into the memory hole by the feds. Few Maritimers know their own history beyond the scope of high school pap.

    There are some political advantages to be gained by offering a critical presentation of history, as true here as it is in the South. But harping on the degree of past injustices only goes so far. If people are comfortable, what do they really care? However, it can be complimentary propaganda to dove-tail onto PPO collapse. The past is gone forever. Only current conditions can act as social drivers.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s