by Rob Williams
Download PDF

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appear­ance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.
— Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776

This month—July—marks a moment every year when citizens all over this country celebrate the writing of the “Declaration of Independence.” Penned by Thomas Jefferson in 1776 at the behest of Philadelphia’s first Continental Congress, the Declaration made a series of bold statements about the nature of the human condition, and the relationship between citizens and governments. We know these radical words well, and there is power and meaning in them.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

In the midst of our twenty-first-century independence daze—the brou­haha and barbecues, the bunting and the beer—most of us imagine these famed and oft-quoted words marked “a new birth of freedom” (to quote Abraham Lincoln in his 1863 Gettysburg Address) and the creation of the United States as a nation. Not so. The United States would not be born until 1783, with the official signing of the Treaty of Paris—and only then as a loosely allied group of thirteen sovereign states under the Articles of Confederation. Make no mistake—the Declaration of Independence was about secession.

The document marked the official declaration of independence from Great Britain by a small group of committed English colonists tired of being governed from afar by King George, London’s Parliament, and large multinational monopolies like the East India Tea Company. Corruption, cronyism, and government by fiat drove these colonists—rebels all—to question their attachments to the richest and most power­ful empire on earth (the British Empire, over which, it was said, the sun never set), and to begin to imagine new possibilities for their lives and those of their children.

We too easily forget that all of our founding fathers and mothers—George Washington, Abigail Adams, James Madison, Molly Pitcher, Ben Franklin, and the rest of the cast and crew—were, in fact, secessionists, and that the very first active verb in Jefferson’s famous 1776 “shout heard ’round the world” is: “dissolve.” Remember?

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opin­ions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Almost one year to the day after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, citizens here in the Green Mountains created the first Vermont republic—independent of any control by the British, the Yorkers, and, for a time, the new United States government—with the July 8, 1777, signing of Vermont’s first constitution in the town of Windsor. For the next fourteen years, the independent republic of Vermont convened an elected assembly, coined its own money (upon which was inscribed “Vermont res publica”), operated a postal service, conducted military operations and diplomatic relations and trade, recruited and commanded its own militia, and wrote its own laws in a legislature elected at town meeting, where the people also elected the governor and his twelve-member council. This fourteen-year period—the “Spirit of 1777”—marks a decisive historic moment for the citizens of this sovereign state, a time when Vermonters governed themselves and ran their own affairs, in concert with the rest of the world, rather than being governed by a distant government as a very small cog in a much larger machine.

We urge Vermonters to once again consider choosing this path. For the richest and most powerful nation of the twenty-first-century world is no longer Great Britain, but the United States.

And, as we have argued in these pages for three years now, the United States is no longer a constitutional republic responsive to the will of its citizens, but an aggressive empire acting at the behest of the few at the expense of the many. We face a twenty-first-century world very different from the twentieth.

“Let facts,” as Jefferson said, “be submitted to a candid world.”

  • The twin twenty-first-century challenges of climate change and peak oil, which will compel us toward relocalization and “power down” living much more quickly than we may realize.
  • The U.S. government’s global (and profitable) pursuit of a policy of “full-spectrum dominance” by building an “empire of bases” (as many as 1,000) to engage in a multisequential energy war whose ultimate goal is to control oil-rich parts of the planet (a war that “will not end in our lifetimes”).
  • Federal implementation of a whole host of mandates that undermine our most basic rights and cherished freedoms: the USA PATRIOT Act, a proposed National Animal ID System, and the ever-increasing use of radio frequency ID, biometrics, and other “total information” surveillance technologies.
  • Stupendous electoral fraud committed by collusion between political party hacks and corporately owned proprietary elec­tronic voting codes and machines.
  • Massive corporate corruption and a globalized “tapeworm economy” sanctioned by both major political parties.

All of this demands that we in Vermont reconsider our relationship with this “Leviathan” called the United States. Both Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine were right in 1776. “ ’Tis time to part.” Secession is simple common sense, and Vermont’s “Spirit of 1777” offers us a way forward. As Paine’s Common Sense words remind us, time is on our side.

Free Vermont. Long live the Untied States.

July 25, 2008

Beyond Our Independence Daze: Secession, Common Sense, and “the Spirit of 1777”

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appear­ance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason. — Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776
July 25, 2008

The Violence of the Centralized State

The time has come for a third American Revolution. The first revolu­tion occurred in 1776, when thirteen out of thirty British colonies in the western hemisphere seceded to prevent consolidation into an increas­ingly centralized British empire. John Adams, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson were secessionists. The second revolution, the oppo­site of the first, occurred between 1861 and 1865 (the misnamed “Civil War”) to create a consolidated American Union that could compete with the empires of Europe; a regime “one and indivisible” from which seces­sion would be impossible.
July 18, 2008

Distributism: Beyond Capitalism and Socialism

Fritz Schumacher used to tell the story of the three professionals sitting around arguing about whose was the oldest profession. The doctor said that his was the oldest because God operated on Adam to remove his rib to make Eve. The architect, however, declared that even before that God built the world out of chaos. Yes, said the economist, but who do you think made that?
July 18, 2008

Left and Right: An Introduction to Decentralism

Throughout human history, there has been a persistent yearning among ordinary peoples to live under comprehensible social, political, and economic conditions that afforded them shared customs and memories, agreed-upon standards of right behavior, recognized status, security against brigandage and invasion, and reasonable prospects for achieving economic security.
May 22, 2008

Designing Our Future in a Changing World: An Interview with Ben Falk

Whole Systems Design, Inc., describes its work as “occurring at the inter­face of people and land—where the built and biological environments meet.” Based in Vermont’s Mad River Valley, Whole Systems Design integrates ecology, landscape architecture, site development, construc­tion, farming, education, and other disciplines. Founder Ben Falk holds a master’s degree in landscape design and has taught at the University of Vermont and Harvard’s Arnold Arboretum. Vermont Commons editor Rob Williams conducted this interview.
April 25, 2008

V For Vermont: A Concluding Call To Action

First. Turn off the TeeVee. Stop reading the newspaper and the mainstream media (MSM) outlets on your computer and tracking device (a.k.a. “smart phone”) for a while. Give yourself a break from being constantly marketed to, cajoled, lied to, and manipulated.
September 14, 2007

The Food Less Traveled

When I heard Michael Ableman, of the Center for Urban Agriculture, speak in Vermont last year, there was one statement he made that I have returned to frequently throughout the year—“pleasure is a better moti­vator for change than guilt.” He continued, “How do we provide an invi­tation, rather than a harangue?” It is hard to determine what thing or combination of things motivates social change—this is a question that traverses disciplines, whether studying educational change or political change.
May 25, 2007

Origins of the New England Secession Tradition

The Vermont independence effort is guided by a peaceful group of thoughtful citizens who believe that Vermont would be better off as a small independent country like Iceland, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Luxembourg, or Switzerland than to remain under the domination of an overly centralized and increasingly out-of-control central federal government. To some, the idea of an independent Vermont is preposter­ous but harmless, more theater than serious policy. To others it smacks of treason. Did not the Civil War settle forever the question of whether a state within the United States can secede? It did not.
May 18, 2007

The Decentralist Movement: A Third Way

Just a few weeks ago I took seven large boxes of books from my library to give to the E. F. Schumacher Library just outside of Great Barrington, Massachusetts—books I’d gathered for years on decentralism, anar­chism, community, separatism, and the like—and I was struck once again by the depth, tenacity, and importance of the movement to which I was contributing. For the Schumacher Society and its library were established to provide an intellectual and activist home for what we can call, loosely, the decentralist movement. This is the Third Way that has existed for a century or so outside the varieties of centralists, both conservative and liberal; a movement that has vigorously put forth cogent alternatives to the modern-capitalist industrial nation-state.
May 9, 2007

The Great Hydropower Heist: How Corporations Colonized Our Watershed Commons

From Vermont’s founding as a Republic in 1777 until the early 1900s, its citizens were far more energy independent than we find ourselves now. The old-timers traveled and transported goods with an efficient blend of the original horse power and coal-fired steam trains. They heated largely with wood and built hundreds of small hydropower facilities—initially, mechanized mills that utilized raw waterwheel power and were later retrofitted with electric generators and complementary coal-fired steam-powered systems. Hence, the claim: “Hydro—the power that built Vermont.” Now Vermonters spend roughly $2 billion every year on out-of-state fuels for transportation, heating, industrial applications, and electricity. More than $1 billion pays for imported oil and gas alone.
September 9, 2006

Local Currency: A Revolution That Sounds Like a Whisper

When the French and Russian revolutions overthrew the estab­lished orders in their countries (in 1786 and 1917, respectively), they changed just about everything, but not their monetary systems. — Bernard A. Lietaer, Of Human Wealth
September 9, 2006

Money and Liberty

The U.S. monetary system has been a scandal for a long time; whether it can continue much longer without intolerable social, political, and ecological consequences is an open question. Yet most Americans don’t have a clue about it. “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system,” Henry Ford said, “for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”