The right of personal secession.

August 11, 2008

All rights are human rights. They reside in the human person. The right of association is also the right of disassociation, for neither makes sense without the other. The right of secession is generally thought of as the right of one territory to disassociate itself politically from another. Kritarchy recognizes the right of personal secession, again because every right is a human right first and only. Groups do not have rights, though every member of a group has all human rights by virtue of their humanity.

A blog entry at Lew Rockwell reports on a survey which shows that a substantial number of Americans believe in the right of secession. That is good news for kritarchists, who seek to exercise the right of secession, not territorially but personally.

About these ads

3 Responses to “The right of personal secession.”

  1. Bruce Graeme Says:

    [K]ritarchists seek to exercise the right of secession, not territorially but personally.

    Is that so? Really?
    Let us hear what the Rothbard has to say of this!
    (or will he be censored?)

    Contemporary libertarians often assume, mistakenly, that individuals are bound to each other only by the nexus of market exchange. They forget that everyone is necessarily born into a family, a language, and a culture. Every person is born into one or several overlapping communities, usually including an ethnic GROUP, with specific values, cultures, religious beliefs, and traditions.

    One goal for libertarians should be to transform existing nation-states into national entities whose boundaries could be called just, in the same sense that private property boundaries are just; that is, to decompose existing coercive nation-states into genuine nations, or nations by consent.

    Every group, every nationality, should be allowed to secede from any nation-state and to join any other nation-state that agrees to have it. That simple reform would go a long way toward establishing nations by consent.

    To adopt an excellent strategem of Ludwig von Mises in abstracting from contemporary emotions: Let us postulate two contiguous nation-States, “Ruritania” and “Fredonia.” Fredonians should be able to secede voluntarily from Fredonia and join their com-
    rades in Ruritania.

  2. kritarchist Says:

    I am familiar with Rothbard’s article “Nations by Consent”, and agree with it wholeheartedly. You are absolutely correct in everything you say here. My point was that the right of secession resides in the individual person because of his humanity, and extends naturally to all his associations, even those he does not choose but are chosen for him, by which I am referring to governments which claim sovereignty over him against his consent, which is pretty much every government today. The one problem with territorial secession is that it will almost certainly include people who do not assent to the separation. That is why I see the preferable path to be from the bottom up rather than the top down, with the individual seceeding, most likely as a member of a voluntary association such as a kritarchy, and preferably with his family and friends joining him. This way, within a particular territory, those who are of different language and culture groups can coexist peacefully, just as people of different religions now coexist as neighbors in my neighborhood.

    As for “censoring” your previous contribution, I was exercising my ownership rights of this blog by deleting an entry that was completely off topic.

  3. Bruce Graeme Says:

    In his book “Democracy: The God That Failed”, Hans Hermann Hoppe defends a libertarian system or conception commonly referred to as “anarcho-capitalism” which he alternately decribes as “private property anarchy”, “natural order” or “private law society”. Such a natural order, according to the author, is “characterized by increased discrimination, segregation,spatial separation, uniculturalism (CULTURAL HOMOGENEITY), exclusivity, and exclusion.

    In the same vein, Rothbard developed the idea of the nation as a collective identity based on language, etnicity, race, and religion. [cf. Lew Rockwell in "Speaking of Liberty" (page 447)]

    “Decomposing the swollen central nation-State of Yugoslavia into constituent parts has solved
    many conflicts by providing independent nationhood for Slovenes, Serbs,and Croats, but what about Bosnia, where many towns and villages are MIXED? One solution is to encourage more of the same, through still more decentralization. If, for example, eastern Sarajevo is Serb and western Sarajevo is Muslim, then they become parts of their respective separate nations.”- Rothbard


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: