Posted in Ballot Access News
On December 17, the 9th circuit denied a rehearing en banc in Alaskan Independence Party v State of Alaska, 07-35186. The issue was whether a political party’s freedom of association extends to controlling who can run in its primary. The original decision on October 6 sided with the state, but didn’t really grapple with the constitutional issues involved, and seemed to think the case was about whether the government can require parties to nominate by primary. It is possible the Alaskan Independence Party will ask for U.S. Supreme Court review.
19 responses so far ↓
1 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 5:18 am
Don’t you just love secessionists?
2 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 11:16 am
As a general principle, yes. It is too bad that the CSA gave secession a bad name. If only they were willing to let go of chattel slavery – an institution that would have been quickly doomed anyway for economic reasons, particularly without the fugitive slave laws in the north – much of Europe would have joined the war on their side, and they would have won independence.
Alaska is an excellent geographic position to win independence, and keep it by playing the Russians and Americans off against each other. They already have a strong private gun culture, and could probably acquire a nuclear deterrent to reconquest with a small bit of work.
They have a strong resource base; add secret banking and low taxes/regulation, and they could easily be a world economic powerhouse.
Alaska is also fairly tolerant of marijuana and hemp, and could lead a hemp fuel etc. industrial and medical revolution as an independent nation (see Jack Herer, The Emperor Wears No Clothes). They are well positioned for trade with East Asia, and may be on some very desirable real estate if the globe warms.
On the downside, they have a heavy reliance on US military bases and related employment, and resulting social support for US imperialism. Thus, secession advocates have a lot of public opinion work to do in Alaska.
3 G.E. // Dec 23, 2008 at 11:23 am
paul – The worst part is that even the secessionists make the case for allowing the federal government to continue occupying Alaska post-secession. Bob Bird says Alaskans have a lot of bad socialist ideas. There is a lot of state ownership of resources, etc.
4 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 11:43 am
An Alaskan-Siberian nation might be an interesting idea for the future. Probably not short term, though, and hopefully we will evolve beyond “nations” altogether by the time it becomes politically possible.
5 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Paulie, the CSA gave slavery a bad name. Secession is more popular than ever.
At the beginning of the 20th Century, which you can confirm by looking in, say, a 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica, there were about 110 nations in the world. These included several huge empires, including Britain, France, Holland, Italy, Germany, Turkey. You could look it up.
Currently there are 192 member states of the United Nations, 10 widely regarded sovereign territories, 2 observor status countries, 60 dependent territories, 8 identifiable special status territories (e.g,. Hong Kong) and secession movements in some 110 existing countries comprising almost 600 identifiable new territories. These are just some of the entities which could potentially form their own countries – there are about a thousand identifiable native populations in the Western Hemisphere and over two thousand in Africa, each of which can identify its own traditional territory. There are also disputed territories such as Tibet.
Comprehensive lists of countries often list 230 or more, depending on who is counting and what is regarded as a country. So, we haven’t even reached a century from the 1911 encyclopedia, and we’ve already more than doubled the number of countries. This trend is going to continue.
The other trend, of creating more nefarious supra-national entities, like the EU or the UN, seems to be having trouble. There’s been a lot more talk about having more such entities than there has been formation of such groups.
And, curiously, there seems to be no difficulty in both trends existing on the same planet at the same time. Secretary of State Warren Christopher lamented to the Tofflers roughly 1993 that the state department might have to deal with five thousand or more countries within twenty years.
Personally, I don’t think there is any practical upper limit on the number of countries. Every individual, after all, might aspire to be sovereign.
6 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Secession is more popular than ever.
In the US it is still primarily associated with the CSA, slavery and racism. I’m not saying that perception is correct, but that is the first thing people tend to think of whenever you say secession. This, even though the US was founded by seceding from Britain.
Other countries don’t have the same history.
7 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 23, 2008 at 2:55 pm
@4
And what of the people that don’t wish to be apart of this “Alaskan-Siberian nation”? Too bad?
8 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Nonsense, Paulie. Here’s a list of secession movements in the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_autonomist_and_secessionist_movements#United_States_.28North_America.29
You wanna tell the Lakota, the Black Panthers, the Aztlan, the Vermont groups that they are racist, you go right ahead. Let me just take cover behind this engine block over here….
9 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:05 pm
@8
Tere are thousands [hundreds?] of micronatons operating in the US as well. Wouldn’t they be considered secessionist? Here’s one
The Kingdom of Talossa
http://www.kingdomoftalossa.net/
Yeah, I was a citizen
10 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Wikipedia offers a list of some dozens of micronations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_micronations
They also list many dozens of extinct states.
11 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Just proves that there is a free market in governance… but the US mafia is using violence to keep power for itself
12 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Jim: yes, I’m aware of that. Now, go out on an average street and ask a hundred people at random to tell you the first three words that pop in their head when you say secession.
13 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Where do I find an average street? Kansas? Texas? Arkansas? Keene, NH?
14 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Any of those would probably do. If you want to make it more accurate, make it a nationwide random survey with as large a sample as you can handle.
15 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Okay. Done. Nobody said racism.
Oh, I’m sorry, you were paying me to survey a random and representative sample? The largest sample I could handle was one, and he said “freedom, sovereignty, justice.”
16 paulie cannoli // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Jim, I’m not paying for anything. It has been my experience that most non-libertarian Americans tend to associate secessionism primarily with slavery and racism. If you wish to disprove me, or to see whether I am correct, you can do the survey on your own. Or you can just deny that it’s true. Well, I’d like to deny the existence of the regime, or many other wrong-headed views prevailing among the public at large, but that does not make them go away.
17 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:45 pm
That’s why most Americans suck.
18 JimDavidson // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I think support for the regime is far thinner and more illusory that most people perceive.
I tell you what, I don’t give a sh!t what the average guy in a diner thinks. I’m not even convinced that he does think. He’s about 80% unlikely to secede. So screw him.
19 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 23, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Most Americans are like vassa states that have been vassals so long that most citizens don’t think of themselves as a separate identity. They’re just bred stupid.
Leave a Comment