Ron Paul: This weekend I got a couple of calls from the media asking me questions about Rick Perry, our governor here in Texas and the statements he made about possible secession. Now, he didn’t call for secession, but he was restating a principle that was long held and at least in the original time of our country, and that is that there was a right to secession.
Actually, after the Civil War, nobody believes there is a so-called right to secession, but it is a very legitimate issue to debate because all of the states that came into the Union before the Civil War believed they have a right to secede and New England in the early part of the 19th century actually considered it, and nobody questioned them about whether they had the right to do it or not.
Since the Civil War, it’s been sort of a dead issue, but he brought it up. It stirred the media and believe me, it really stirred some of the liberal media where they started really screaming about what is going on here. “This is un-American”, I heard one individual say, “This is treasonous to even talk about it.”
Well, they don’t know their history very well because if they think about it, it’s an American tradition. It’s very American to talk about secession. That’s how we came into being. Thirteen colonies seceded from the British and established a new country, so secession is very much an American principle.
What about all the strong endorsements we have given over the past decade or two of those republics that seceded from the Soviet system? We were delighted with this. We never said, “Oh no. Secession is treasonous”.
No. Secession is a good principle. Just think of the benefits that would have come over these last 230-some years if the principle of secession had existed. That means the federal government would always have been restrained, not to overburden the states with too much federalism, too many federal rules and regulations.
But since that was all wiped out with the Civil War, the federal government has grown by leaps and bounds and we have suffered the consequences, and we need to reconsider this. It’s not un-American to think about the possibility of secession. This is something that’s voluntary. We came together voluntarily. A free society means you can dissolve it voluntarily. That was the whole issue was about.
Just remember one of the reasons that Wilson drove us in unnecessarily into World War I. He talked about what we have to give, have every country in the world the benefit of self-determination, a good principle. Of course, I don’t think he really believed that. But self-determination is a good principle. It’s a very American principle, so to me it’s a shame that we can’t discuss this.
You know, it’s interesting that so many of us have been taught for so many years, and as long as I can remember from the first grade on up taking the pledge of allegiance that we have a republic that’s “indivisible” and we have been preached that and preached it. So therefore, there is no contest, no question since the Civil War that we have even the thought that this could happen.
But you know what a lot of people don’t talk about and they really don’t even know about is who wrote the pledge to the flag. The pledge to the flag came from, for instance, Bellamy, an avowed Socialist who wanted to put into concrete in the pledge this principle of being indivisible, and he did it, you know, for the celebration ironically 400 years of the celebration of the landing of Christopher Columbus, so it was in 1892.
I mean, the pledge of allegiance has not been here, you know, all our history. So I think it’s worth of discussion. I think people should discuss this because right now, the American people are sick and tired of it all and I think the time will come when people will consider it much more seriously is when the federal government can no longer deliver. That time will come when the dollar collapses.
No matter what they do and how many promises they have and how many bailouts they have, they can’t do it if the money doesn’t work. So then, the independence of the states will come back and it doesn’t mean that you’ll be un-American to even contemplate what might have to be done once the dollar crashes.
While this video was originally recorded on 4/19/2009, Ron Paul spokeswoman Rachel Mills confirmed earlier today (11/13/2012) that Ron Paul “feels the same now” about secession as he did in this video.
Processing your request, Please wait....
" -
The war was about economics, the south had a large investment in slavery, of course! Very unfortunate that the acts of Lincoln only fortified the powers of the Federal Government (whether intentional or not). The point is that these new powers gained by Lincoln, after the war was over, were never given back to the states, and the Fed grew bigger and more corrupt.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The slaves weren’t being freed, they were escaping and could be returned at any time to their former owners. The cause was states rights vs the fed, and slavery was a bisection of states vs gov, a big one. Lincoln supported states rights, and felt the gov had no rightful power to take their slaves, just to stop its expansion. He freed them because 1) it would end the war and 2) he felt it was the right thing to do. You’re trying to change history; it won’t work
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The civil war was NOT about slavery! The slaves were already being freed during the underground rail-rode movement in mass numbers. The main cause of the civil war WAS state rights vs the Federal Government. Lincoln was a big fan of the Federal Government, and hated state sovereignty. Your history books are propaganda which portray Lincoln to be the greatest President, when in fact his legacy was much more harm than good!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
He didn’t get elected because its rigged
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Again, the system itself isn’t perfect. But at least Lincoln tried his best to avoid the corrupted money controllers in Wall Street and most of all, City of London. And the reason why Civil War happens so fast is because of the money controllers that use their scheme to split the U.S. as their revenge after their disgraceful defeat at the hand of Andrew Jackson’s Bank War. But the again, I could be wrong.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There’s one of the few dark side when comes to fiat paper currency, but what I learnt is that the late President Lincoln shocked by the interest rates charged by the bankers in Wall Street for the war’s finance. So with congress and Secretary of Treasury approval, the Greenback was born. Of course, BOTH Dixie and Northern states used fiat currency, but compare to the inflation rates on both sides’ currency, Greenback suffered less compare to their southern neighbor.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What you forgot to say is that printing paper money which was not backed by gold (i.e. fiat money) was unconstitutional. By the end of the war these “greenbacks” were virtually worthless. Therefore, the public financed the war through a hidden tax called inflation. Lincoln also instituted an unconstitutional income tax to pay for the war.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The United States was formed by 13 independent colonies / states. None of the states would have entered the union without the belief that they could secede. The New England states threatened to secede three times in the early 1800s. Three states, Virginia, Rhode Island and New York included the right to secede in their approval of the Constitution. The conservative states need to secede now before the dollar and the country collapse!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The United States was formed by 13 independent colonies / states. None of the states would have entered the union without the belief that they could secede. The New England states threatened to secede three times in the early 1800s. Three states, Virginia, Rhode Island and New York included the right to secede in their approval of the Constitution. The conservative states need to secede now before the dollar and the country collapse!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The United States was formed by 13 independent colonies / states. None of the states would have entered the union without the belief that they could secede. The New England states threatened to secede three times in the early 1800s. Three states, Virginia, Rhode Island and New York included the right to secede in their approval of the Constitution. The conservative states need to secede now before the dollar and the country collapse!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The United States was formed by 13 independent colonies / states. None of the states would have entered the union without the belief that they could secede. The New England states threatened to secede three times in the early 1800s. Three states, Virginia, Rhode Island and New York included the right to secede in their approval of the Constitution. The conservative states need to secede now before the dollar and the country collapse!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Despite his controversial sides, Abraham Lincoln is one of a few U.S. presidents that actually limited the power of the money changers in Wall Street with his debt-free, independent Greenback currency. This debt-free, independent currency even existed in colonial period of America. Of course, this kind of currency HATED by money controllers in City of London and later Wall Street back at that time.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mujaku…you really are an imbecile that can only talk of violence. If you have any clue about American history you should know that when Texas joined the U.S. from Mexico on 1848 they did under the condition they could secede if they were unhappy with the federal government. This was written into law and still stands today. Texas can legally secede at anytime…that’s why it’s called the lone star state you bloody moron!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Southern states were armed rebels. They had no right of secession. Lincoln did what any president would do, crush the rebels with military force. For example, if Texas were to secede, Texas would be destroyed until they completely surrendered. All the perpetrators would be executed without mercy.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Total crap Paul. Let’s not forget ‘real history’ (not crackpot libertarian history). President Lincoln summed it up privately in stating that secession was not a debatable question, could not be tolerated, and would be treated as treason and rebellion.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
NOPE , BUT HE INHERITED THE TYRANNICAL UNIONS WILL AND CONTINUED THAT 1828 TARIFF ACT ANYWAYS AND UNCONSTITUTIONALLY BEGAN TO ATTACK THE SOUTH!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lincoln had nothing to do with that. He was still at home in Iliinois
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TARIFF ACT OF 1828!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Try to make your sentences make sense, please. And provide me with evidence of any of your assumptions.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I DON’T THINK THAT GETTING ON TOP OF ANOTHER MAN IN MAN IN BED AND THEM UMPING AND KISSING HIS BACK IS WAS COMMON BACK THEN. HE WAS A RACIST HE SAID MANY RACIST QUOTES. HE WAS A TYRANT GO LOOK UP THE TARIFF ACT OF 1828!
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The evidence that points to him being a homosexual is insufficient. While there is no proving he wasn’t gay, if you look at all of the evidence, you’ll see that it was very common for men to behave that way in the 19th century; a form of companionship that is lost today. Also, he was in love with at least two women in his life. He was neither a racist nor a tyrant. Everybody was a racist back then by today’s standards. He welcomed the South home openly & pushed for no punishment. You lose.
Report this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0