The field of secession and/or micronationalism, Fourth and Fifth World Studies if you will, is full of cynical statists like the author of the article below:
It is also full of romantic nationalists, like the author of this article:
Is Secession Anarchy, Treason, and Un-American?
The few people in the middle who are neither cynical statists, nor romantic nationalists, but matter-of-fact political scientists who can demonstrate their theories, and even back them with elegant models in the form of equations like the author of the article below, don’t receive any support:
Book about Advanced Micronationalism published
If some of the strongest Fourth World nations such as Texas are “fictional sovereignties”, then how come a secessionist rally of a mere 200 people required the concerted effort of at least 10 different Examiner.com articles against secession, and this does not include the overwhelming negative mass media bias from all the other news outlets?
I have not read a single mass media article in favour of secession so far, nor have I read a single article of neutral, fact-finding “investigative journalism”. In the mass media secession or micronationalism topics are either treated like lunacy, viewed as illegitimate, viewed as a “settled with the US Civil War” issues, or are somehow viewed as anti-American. Where is the research that proves this? I don’t see any real journalism; I only see ad hominem attacks on secessionists, if not articles designed to outright defame them.
If First World states are not “smoke and mirrors” sovereign states today, have not themselves become “banana republics” as socioeconomic problems have multiplied, and they fiddled their thumbs promoting the interests of the few, rather than the many as their public positions morally and legally required, then how come they no longer have any control of the economy anymore?
What happened to wholesome democratic values, the separation of church and state no longer practiced since churches have begun to be pressured to seek incorporation? What happened to US state sovereignty supposedly sanctioned by the Tenth Amendment? Is it just just a form of “clipped sovereignty”, where the federal government retains only certain powers, or has the federal government of the United States in fact turned US states that where originally sovereign into colonies, American empire colonies no longer even capable of maintaining minimum economic standards for their citizens?
What happened to Freedom of Speech supposedly sanctioned under the First Amendment, but now only the exclusive property of mass media monopoly? Why has the US government not intervened to break up monopolies here? What about the US state governments? What have they done to ensure a reasonably free and diverse public discourse?
Finally, what happened to the separation of state and citizen roles, something never mentioned even by the US’s brightest legal scholars, where the state(s) retain(s) only certain (public) rights, and none of these rights should be construed to deny or disparage other (private) rights retained by the people, including the right to make a living, the right to run one’s life as one pleases, something supposedly sanctioned under the Ninth Amendment?
What happened to such a promising economic system as capitalism? Where are all the jobs our healthy and apparent “First World” economy is supposed to have?
What is the media trying to hide? They are certainly not examining these issues with any credible journalism. Why instead of informing, or even trying to inform, do they engage in a campaign of disinformation whenever secession or micronationalism is mentioned? Who do these puppets work for, these organisations who would like everyone to believe they exist to “inform the public”, to “protect democracy”, and who is actually pulling their strings? What makes the work of the American media in this field any different or superior to the propaganda generated by the media of the former Soviet Union?
Is the United States a First World country anymore, or is it a Banana Republic? Are current UN members genuinely sovereign states, or “smoke and mirrors” sovereign states? Is the corporate mass media part of the solution to these problems, or is it only another industry protecting its turf, even at the expense of its mission statement lately?