American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup

Praise for The Republican Workers Party

The spirit of Buckley’s endeavor represents what is finest in the Trump moment, and what is best in conservatism, too.

—Daniel McCarthy, American Conservative

An early and confident Trump supporter, Buckley makes a persuasive argument that Trump has reshaped American politics, opening up opportunities for ordinary people which his predecessors blocked off.

—Michael Barone, co-author, The Almanac of American Politics

The best explanation of Trumpism that I’ve seen.

—Marvin Olasky, The World

Buckley is by turns scathing, funny, and sympathetic, but always well-informed. He rolls the stone away from the American heart.

—Allen Guelzo

An important and provocative book.

—Michael Ledeen, Front Page Magazine

Frank Buckley is one of the most astute observers of the modern American scene.

—Deroy Murdock

Praise for The Republic of Virtue

Bracing stuff … his writing is lucid and often witty.

—Wall Street Journal

Political corruption, in the form of crony capitalism, is a silent killer of our economy. Frank Buckley’s new book shows how we can rein it in and help restore the Republic.

—William Bennett, former Secretary of Education

This is Buckley at his colorful, muckraking best—an intelligent, powerful, but depressing argument laced with humor.

—Gordon S. Wood, Pulitzer Prize winner

Praise for The Way Back: Restoring the Promise of America

Frank Buckley marshals tremendous data and insight in a compelling study.

—Francis Fukuyama

Best book of the year.

—Michael Anton

Praise for The Once and Future King: The Rise of Crown Government in America

His prose explodes with energy.

—James Ceasar

THE LOOMING THREAT OF A NATIONAL BREAKUP

American Secession

F. H. BUCKLEY

© 2020 by F.H. Buckley

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Encounter Books, 900 Broadway, Suite 601, New York, New York, 10003.

First American edition published in 2020 by Encounter Books, an activity of Encounter for Culture and Education, Inc., a nonprofit, tax exempt corporation.

Encounter Books website address: www.encounterbooks.com

Manufactured in the United States and printed on acid-free paper. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48–1992

(R 1997) (Permanence of Paper).

FIRST AMERICAN EDITION

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Names: Buckley, F. H. (Francis H.), 1948– author.

Title: American secession : the looming threat of a national breakup / by F. H. Buckley.

Description: New York : Encounter Books, [2020] | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2019018857 (print) | LCCN 2019981176 (ebook) | ISBN 9781641770804 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781641770811 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Secession—United States. | Polarization (Social sciences)—United States. | States’ rights (American politics) | United States—Politics and government—21st century. | United States—Politics and government—Philosophy.

Classification: LCC JK311 .B83 2020 (print) | LCC JK311 (ebook) | DDC 320.973—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019018857

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019981176

For Esther, Sarah, Nick and Benjamin Herbert

CONTENTS

Preface

PART I: A CURE FOR A DIVIDED PEOPLE?

  1  One Nation, Divisible

  2  When Secession Is Politically Correct

  3  Secession: A How-To Guide

PART II: A CURE FOR BIGNESS?

  4  Bigness and Badness

  5  Bigness and Happiness

  6  Bigness and Corruption

  7  Bigness and the Military

  8  Bigness and Freedom

  9  Bigness and Wealth

PART III: LESSER CURES

10  Secession Lite

11  Home Rule

12  Everything That Rises Must Converge

Appendix

Acknowledgments

Notes

Index

PREFACE

This is a book about breakups, about how countries split apart and how the United States is ripe for secession. Across the world, established states have divided in two or are staring down secession movements. Great Britain became a wee bit less great with Irish independence, and now the Scots seem to be rethinking the 1707 Act of Union. Czechoslovakia is no more and the former Soviet Union is just that: former. Go down the list and there are secession groups in nearly every country. And are we to think that, almost alone in the world, we’re immune from this?

Countries threaten to split apart when their people seem hopelessly divided. I’ve seen it already. Before moving to the United States, I lived in a country just as divided, without the kind of fellow feeling required to hold people together. Canada was an admirably liberal country, and yet it came within a hair’s breadth of secession. America is headed the same direction today, and without the reserve and innate conservatism that has permitted Canadians to shrug off differences.

We’re less united today than we’ve been at any time since the Civil War, divided by politics, religion and culture. In all the ways that matter, save for the naked force of the law, we are already divided into two nations just as much as in 1861. The contempt for opponents, the Twitter mobs, online shaming and no-platforming, the growing tolerance of violence—it all suggests we’d be happier in separate countries.

That’s enough to make secession seem attractive. But there’s a second reason why secession beckons. We’re overlarge, one of the biggest and most populous countries in the world. Smaller countries, as I’ll show, are happier and less corrupt. They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily, and they’re freer. If there are advantages to bigness, the costs exceed the benefits. Bigness is badness.

It might therefore seem odd that we’ve stayed together so long. If divorces are made in Heaven, as Oscar Wilde remarked, how did we luck out? The answer, of course, is the Civil War. The example of Secession 1.0 in 1861, with its 750,000 wartime deaths, has made Secession 2.0 seem too painful to consider. But this book will explode the comforting belief that it couldn’t happen again. The barriers to a breakup are far lower than most people would think, and if the voters in a state were determined to leave the Union they could probably do so.

To begin with, we’re far more likely to let it happen today than we were in 1861. John Kerry had a point when he said that Putin, by invading Crimea, was behaving as if it were the nineteenth century. While the secretary of state was mocked for what seemed like naiveté, public attitudes have in fact changed since 1861. We are now less willing to take up arms in order to maintain the Union and readier to accept a breakup instead.

Second, a cordial divorce might be worked out through the amending machinery of a convention held under Article V of the Constitution, if all sections of America were good and tired of each other. Secession cannot be unconstitutional when there’s a constitutional way of making it happen, through a constitutional convention.

Finally, the Supreme Court might revisit its denial of a right of secession. The originalists on the Court would recognize that the Framers had thought that states had the right to secede, while the more politically minded members of the Court might hesitate before ruling secession illegal and permitting the president to make war against a state. Instead, the Court could be expected to look northward, to the more nuanced view of secession rights taken by the Canadian Supreme Court, which rejected both an absolute right and an absolute bar to secession.

So it’s not difficult to imagine an American breakup. The reasons why a state might want to secede today are more compelling than at any time in recent history. Slavery isn’t on the ballot, and there would be no undoing of the civil rights revolution anywhere. Indeed, the states with the most active secession movements are progressive and want to escape from a federal government they think too conservative. Were secession to happen today, it would be politically correct.

So it might happen. I see us on a train, bound for a breakup. The switches that might stop us have failed, and if we want to remain united we must learn how to slow the engine. That will take things that have been in short supply lately: a greater tolerance for ideological differences, thicker skin to imagined slights, a deeper repository of confidence in and sympathy for our fellow Americans. These are things we used to have, and can learn to have again if we recognize that the alternative is secession.

Federalism used to allow for greater differences among the states, and that permitted us to sort out our differences by settling among people with like beliefs. And while federalism was discredited when it sought to excuse racist Jim Crow laws in the South, we’ve left that world long behind. That is why I propose, as a solution to our divisions and an antidote to secession, a devolution of power to the states—not mere federalism, but the alternative that the British presented to the Continental Congress in 1778 after it had decided upon secession through the Declaration of Independence. It was what Gladstone and Charles Stuart Parnell sought as an alternative to Ireland’s outright secession. The solution was home rule, and if adopted in America this would return more power to a seceding state than it possesses now, or ever possessed under American federalism.

Part I will examine the case for a breakup as a solution to our deep social and political divisions. Split into two countries, we’d probably get along better with each other, and there are feasible ways in which this might happen. Part II will then look at secession as a cure for bigness. Smaller countries are happier, less corrupt, and better governed, and we’re one of the biggest countries around. Finally, Part III will discuss alternatives to outright secession, for while that’s a distinct possibility, this book is meant as a call to civility and a warning to those who seek to divide us. Before you criminalize honest policy differences, before you dox your ideological enemies and drive them from restaurants, remember that they have exit options!

PART I

A CURE FOR A DIVIDED PEOPLE?

We’ve hit rock bottom.

—Senator John Kennedy (R-LA)

1

ONE NATION, DIVISIBLE

Meet Don Livingston. He’s a South Carolina native who taught philosophy at Emory University. A respected academic, he’s the author of two well-regarded books on David Hume and an exceptional presence in Hume studies according to a reviewer in a leading philosophical journal.¹ He is courtly, ironic and bearded, the very picture of an academic philosopher. He’s also a secessionist.

Livingston isn’t just a secessionist, mind you. He’s also a southern partisan. The first time I met him, in Montreal, he was sporting Stars and Bars suspenders and wanted to talk about the Quebec independence movement. In 2003 he founded the Abbeville Institute, named after the birthplace of John C. Calhoun in South Carolina. The Abbeville Institute explores what is true and valuable in the Southern tradition, its writers, customs and songs. The institute hosts a summer school for college and graduate students on the constitutional right of secession and on all the things that are wrong with Massachusetts.

It’s easy to dismiss all this as cranky tomfoolery. Since the Civil War, the idea of secession has been consigned to the political loony bin. But that’s about to change, and not just in the South. Among philosophers, secession is increasingly respectable.² Before long, we’ll hear our politicians take it up too.

The Eternal South

Because of the Civil War, we see secession through the prism of differences between the North and the South, and especially the original sin of American slavery. After the war, slavery was abolished and the Union was preserved. And yet the South has always been different, and always will be. It’s an indigestible part of the Union, with traditions and institutions unlike those of the rest of the country. Southerners are more likely to serve in the military, as Robert E. Lee Prewitt did in From Here to Eternity. Their accent is different, the food is different, the music is different and the manners are very different. They’ll smile at strangers and tip their hats to ladies. When their mothers ask if they want a piece of pie, they’ll say Yes, Ma’am. And if you thank them, they’re apt to say You’re welcome, not merely un-huh.

For southern whites, every home is Tara and every ancestor a Confederate general and the descendant of laughing cavaliers, in a prelapsarian past they cling to all the more fiercely because it is so irretrievably lost. They must live with the knowledge that they, alone among Americans, are a defeated people and have been justifiably scorned for the institution of slavery before the Civil War and their treatment of African Americans thereafter. What that has given their best fiction writers is a darkness and sense of guilt called Southern Gothic.

In Flannery O’Connor’s Everything That Rises Must Converge, a recent college graduate lives in a decayed southern town with his mother, who embarrasses him with her absurd family pride, her racism and her boundless love for him. One day a black woman, outraged by the mother’s condescension, strikes at her and she collapses on the sidewalk. Her son lectures her contemptuously on her need to come to terms with the new racial realities, but the blow will kill her and she dies of a stroke. Her racism is unconscious, while his supercilious liberalism is conscious, heartless and inexcusable. Both are self-deceived and live in a fallen world of inescapable sin. Compare this with the rest of American literature, where go-ahead individuals get ahead, where justice triumphs over evil and tragedy is unknown, and it’s hard to imagine anything more foreign to northern sensibilities than Southern Gothic.

That distinctiveness has made a literary and sociological genre out of southern culture, as described by writers such as Edmund Wilson and James Cobb.³ It has also given us the delicious satire of Florence King, with her tales of bubbas and good old boys, of Scarletts and Melanies.⁴ From the North, Chuck Thompson hilariously describes everything that’s wrong about southerners and concludes we’d be better off without ’em.⁵ Back in 1860, James Pettigru famously described his own state of South Carolina as too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.

Since Pettigru’s time, the South has steadily grown in population, as people have moved there from other parts of the country. Now there are urban pockets that don’t look anything like the surrounding counties. Voters in my own city of Alexandria, Virginia, are very progressive, as are voters in Austin, Texas, and in North Carolina’s Research Triangle. And can anyone explain Florida to me?

Northerners call this the New South, and diehard southerners call it the No South. At the same time, southern culture has migrated to the heartland. The NASCAR circuit, which began in Daytona Beach and Charlotte, with ex-bootleggers from the Thunder Roads of Tennessee and North Carolina, now has racetracks in Illinois and Arizona. As for southern music, it’s gone global. There are jazz clubs in Russia, country and western radio stations in Sweden, rock groups everywhere. We’re all a little southern now, waiting on the levee for the Robert E. Lee.

Nevertheless, the South is still distinctive, after all these years. A recent study of how people feel about Don Livingston’s Stars and Bars flag or Confederate military heroes reveals that many southerners, particularly conservatives and Protestants, still embrace their southern identity.⁶ For liberals in the North too, the South remains another country, a darker one. It’s the place where three civil rights workers were murdered in 1964, the land of the White Citizens Councils and Senator Jim Eastland (D-MS). It’s where people cling to their guns and religion, as Barack Obama said. It’s the place you brand as alien in order to feel good about yourself.

So the differences remain. Even when not at war, North and South have been divided and this has led to three different compacts between them. The first, beginning with our founding and continuing to the Civil War, tolerated slavery as a legal matter. That ended with the war and Reconstruction, and a second