NASC Name Reservation

Dear NAmerican Secessionist (and the curious):

Please note that "North American Secessionist Congress" as name for pending corporate entity, has been officially reserved with the Ohio Secretary of State. In part, the certificate states:

"It is hereby certified that the Secretary of State of Ohio has custody of the business records for NORTH AMERICAN SECESSIONIST CONGRESS and, that said business records show the filing and recording of: NAME RESERVATION."

NASC Steering Committee member, Harold Thomas, did the leg work on this one and hats are off to him. Yesterday, Jenna Orkin over at the FTW Blog gave us a very good plug; international hits to the NASC Forum were up considerably.

For those who are not yet familiar with the proposed NASC, one of several aims is to gather already-committed secessionists, Peak Oil advocates, States' Rights advocates and disenchanted Greens under a common secessionist roof. The common denominator for these three demographics, to one degree or another, is a shared acknowledgement and comprehension of secession. Furthermore, the NAmerican secessionist movement will finally have elected representation via an Executive that functions within the incorporated and legal parameters of a Constitution and Bylaws as determined and ratified by the membership. For anyone who has not yet, to view the forum please visit North American Secessionist Congress, October 2010.

Thanks for your attention,

Sebastian Ronin
Chair, NASC Steering Committee

The Secessionist Convergence Triad

One of the most profound statements to come out of the 2007 Second North American Secessionist Convention held in Chattanooga, as reported by Bill Poovey, was that the movement represented the unlikely partnering of "the far left and far right of American politics coming together." The statement went largely unnoticed; however, it is the philosophical core of the proposed North American Secessionist Congress.

Of the many political illusions that are currently being shattered by the decline of industrial civilization (the collapse of the American Empire is a sub-collapse), two of the most important are the shattering of the two-party system and the shattering of the political notions of “left” and “right.” The symbolic emperor literally wears no clothes!

The political notions of “left” and “right” are in process of being denuded; they still hold significant sway in the public consciousness. Until such time as the two hemispheres converge and, in the process shatter pre-existing molds, the dynamic of far left and far right coming together retains its hold in the public psyche.

It has been proposed that the three political demographics encompassing the secessionist convergence triad are the States’ Rights movement, the Peak Oil movement, and disenchanted Greens. Each demographic recognizes, to one extent or another, the common denominator of secession.

The States’ Rights movement flirts with secession, up to and including the insertion of secession trigger clauses in resolutions. The Peak Oil movement acknowledges institutional collapse and devolution, while still weakly maintaining that such institutional collapse, i.e. secession, does not apply to the social institution of the large industrial nation state. Disenchanted Greens acknowledge the primacy of bioregional, secessionist politics in the face of bastardized federal parties. Within each demographic there reside minority cadres who will perceive the secessionist common denominator and political logic as put forward by the proposed North American Secessionist Congress.

For sake of argument, the convergence may roughly constitute the following breakdown: States’ Rights advocates (political right, 50% of convergence total); Peak Oilers (political left, 30% of convergence total); disenchanted Greens (political left, 20% of convergence total).

So there we have the unlikely partnering of "the far left and far right of American politics coming together." The historical condition always dictates what can and cannot be done. The trick is to perceive the condition for what it is, without resorting to subjective and jingoistic security blankets, and act accordingly.

Secession Is In Our Future

Over the short course of one year the notion of NAmerican secession has snow-balled into the public's political consciousness. The course and media trajectories are roughly the following: last summer's Zogby Poll that revealed support for the right (as opposed to support for secession) of states to secede to be 20%; the comic relief, yet valuable media dividends of Sarah Palin's secessionist ties; the pronouncements of America's geographical decline by the Russian analyst, Igor Panarin; in general, the flourishing of the States' Rights movement complimented by, in particular, the secessionist trigger written into New Hampshire's HCR 0006; Texas Gov. Rick Perry's flirtation with secession, and; corporate media coverage ranging from the Los Angeles Times to the Wall Street Journal.

The most recent established institution to endorse the notion of secession is the Ludwig von Mises Institute with the publication of Secession Is In Our Future. This article offers a concise overview of the legality of secession ranging from the inalienable right of secession, to international law of secession, to U.S. law of secession. It is a good read for all those federalists whose immediate, knee-jerk response to secession is that it is illegal.

Unfortunately, the von Mises article displays two shortcomings that are common to most U.S.A.-centric analyses of secession.

The first of these shortcomings is the focus on individual state secession as opposed to more regional perspectives and perceptions. Granted, secession can only proceed via the legislative authority of one state at a time. However, this does not preclude the incorporation of regional alliances and federations towards the establishment of new, autonomous nations upon the geographical dimensions of North America. As a guide to how these regional breakdowns may evolve, please see How would the U.S.A. fragment? by Phil Gyford.

The second shortcoming is a major philosophical and political blind spot. It is the analysis of secession as a socio-political driver as opposed to secession being a consequence and symptom of greater, underlying dynamics and phenomena. It cannot be stated enough that secession will be a consequence of ecological and financial collapse, in particular, the descent onto a Post-Peak Oil reality.

As the physical infrastructure collapses, so too will the institutional infrastructure. The dynamic of secession is not reversed, as far too many secessionists mistakenly believe. Yes, it will be imperative to retain the social principles of "freedom and liberty" (i.e. States' Rights movement), but in a world of increasing scarcities and hardships this will prove to be a daunting challenge, yet one that must be pursued. It is quite possible that a social contract encompassing social responsibilities will influence and mold our current understanding of what is meant by "freedom and liberty."

For further reading on secession and Post-Peak Oil, please see Post-Peak Oil and NAmerican Regional Secession.

G20 Summit: Post-Peak Oil Blind Spot and Deception

It is always a challenge to blow through the "noise" to arrive at the "information." The risk of over-simplification runs parallel to the effort. However, there is a principle that is worthy of pursuit: in simplicity there may shine a kernel of truth. Of all that has been written and said about the G20 Summit, what is the underlying premise for action amongst the world's leading industrial powers? We need look no further than the Summit's official communiqué.

The official communiqué states: "We start from the belief that prosperity is indivisible; that growth, to be sustained, has to be shared; and that our global plan for recovery must have at its heart the needs and jobs of hard-working families, not just in developed countries but in emerging markets and the poorest countries of the world, too; and must reflect the interests not just of today's population but of future generations, too."

The industrial mantra of growth and prosperity is front and center. This is the underlying premise for the injection of $1 trillion into the IMF by participating nations. This is the cornucopian blind spot that is offered the public. In simplest terms, no matter how bad the global financial and economic predicament may happen to be (and there are now thousands of analyses that one may fall back on) the premise that has come out of the Summit is standard and reactionary: it is business as usual.

Peak Oilers are unanimous in their position that "business as usual" is a non-starter. The underlying collateral for industrial development, i.e. the energy in the ground, has entered the downward slope of depletion. If not full consensus, there is strong opinion within the PO community that 2008 was the peak year. What is more real? The energy collateral in the ground or the financial and economic templates that are superimposed on the collateral, the false notions of capitalism vs. socialism as trumpeted by the corporate media inclusive? (Who owns the "means of production" is secondary to having access to the means of production.)

This break-out onto the terrain of a new paradigm has been outlined clearly and simply by the PO pioneer, Colin Campbell: "Throughout history, people have had difficulty in distinguishing reality from illusion. Reality is what happens, whereas illusion is what we would like to happen. Wishful thinking is a well-worn expression. Momentum is still another element: we tend to assume that things keep moving in the same direction. The world now faces a discontinuity of historic proportions, as nature shows her hand by imposing a new energy reality. There are vested interests on all sides hoping somehow to evade the iron grip of oil depletion, or at least to put it off until after the next election or until they can develop some strategy for their personal or corporate survival. As the moment of truth approaches, so does the heat, the deceptions, the half-truth and the flat lies."

The G20 Summit, in a nutshell, has delivered nothing more than smoke and mirrors, a band-aid for the bankers and an attempt at soothing drool for the public.

The condition matures. The condition will expose the false premises hatched by the G20. The condition is the slide towards Post-Peak Oil and the collapse of industrial civilization. Any analysis short of that is smoke and spin. It is a lie.

Peak Oil Liberals

It would seem that as things currently stand, the leading "radical" voices in the Peak Oil community, e.g. Kunstler, Heinlein, Ruppert, Savinar, Orlov, still cannot bring themselves to the conclusion that the institutional breakdown they recognize and advocate includes the social institution of the industrial nation-state. There is a serious philosophical, ideological, political, and I would say, U.S.A.-centric, blind-spot at work here. The most ludicrous fringe of this philosophical non-position is, of course, that Papa Obama will fix all and mom, apple pie and baseball will be painlessly back on the agenda before we know it. Such pedestrian finger-painting is even evident amongst secessionists who have not yet worked through the paradox and political schizophrenia of attempting to be a "patriotic secessionist."

If the average person on the street is stopped and questioned as to from where stems his/her sense of nationalism, one might well be informed that it is a genetic pre-condition. That is, of course, nonsense. Nationalism is learnt behaviour, it is Pavlovian conditioning to the max.

Until such time as the disintegration of the industrial nation-state (in our case, the United States and Canada) is legitimately incorporated into the Peak Oil dialogue, then the Peak Oil movement remains a political skeleton, a sham and hoax, of what it could and must be.

You can't have it both ways. Massive and cheap energy flow-through over the last 150 years, with the guidance of capital, created the industrial nation-state. The lack and negation of same translates into the demise of said nation-state. To keep heads stuck in the sand around this eventuality merely chases the best of intentions into the herd of denial, but with oh such radical and progressive differentiations.

The Secessionist Mycelium: Introduction

(Note: As of March 1, 2009 this blog will run in tandem with the WordPress blog Novacadia Alliance. Posts, links, etc. from the latter are in process of being brought over from WordPress, ergo "Under Construction").

Having attended the Third North American Secessionist Convention in Manchester, NH this past November, three things became very clear:

1. Delegate coordination and support, and media coverage of the secessionist movement were drastically weak and counter-productive relative to the pending conditions of empire collapse;
2. Events were quickly far out-stripping and out-distancing the philosophical positioning of the movement and its ability to be representative of those events;
3. The existing organizational structure to effectively coordinate the NAmerican secessionist movement was terribly lacking and, by virtue of a haphazard organizational initiative, was sadly undemocratic.

None of these observations is meant in any way to denigrate from the work invested by individuals and secessionist organizations over the past three years to kick-start the NAmerican secessionist dialogue. At any given time, we do what we can with the resources at-hand. However, there comes a time at the early stages of the life-cycle of any organization and/or movement when it is necessary to claw one's way up to the next level. That time has arrived.

As a sub-item of the first point above, i.e. lack of delegate coordination and support, it was also apparent that the secessionist movement was not well-represented by two major demographics: Peak Oilers and disillusioned, bioregional Greens, to both of which secession is practically an automatic fit.

Two other events have come into play since the Third North American Secessionist Convention. The first is, of course, the wild-fire flourishing of the States' Rights movement in the United States. The second event is the assertive, secessionist re-positioning of both the federal Bloc Quebecois and the provincial Parti Quebecois in Canada.

Taking the above conditions into consideration and after initial dialogue with other secessionists, it has been decided to bring into play a Steering Committee to pull together the inaugural meeting of the North American Secessionist Congress in Columbus, OH on October 16-18, 2009. The status of this proposed historic event is still "tentative." However, work is underway by the Steering Committee to firstly solidify its own legitimacy and then to probe for and determine support for holding the Columbus meeting.

Please check in every now and then to see how things are going as we prepare to trudge towards Columbus.

See also: NAmerican Secessionist Movement Asleep-At-The-Wheel

De-brief, March 10 Meeting (email sent to supporters)

Thank you for the interest you have shown in my effort to introduce the dual political notions of peak oil, and the bioregional and political labeling of Atlantica via the medium of my independent’s campaign in Central Nova. The challenge remains to tap unexplored political turf. It is a daunting undertaking.

The poor turn-out at my nomination meeting of March 10 left me not so much disappointed, as it did perplexed. The poor turn-out (result) must be seen within the context of “marketing” initiatives (action) undertaken over several months: reasonably good positioning in the local print media to familiarize my name and the peripherals of my position (most residents of rural Central Nova are not online); both up and running web and blog sites for those who are online; hard copy announcement of the meeting on bulletin boards a week in advance of the meeting; two shotgun email announcements (300 plus) of the meeting sent to the business communities of New Glasgow, Antigonish and Guysborough, with the request to further the announcement to the recipients’ email contact lists.

Standard and very conservative "marketing" numbers should have delivered an attendance of at least 50. This was sadly far from the case. Based on the result relative to the input, I am left pondering the following: the political culture of Central Nova (and other rural ridings in Nova Scotia) is so closed as to not allow for the consideration of political alternatives, let alone the limited adoption of such alternatives; political identification with standard parties is so unquestioningly and parochially accepted and locked in to as to not allow for alternative political interpretations; the pending economic and social “hurt” that will be accompanied by peak oil is the only reasonable and hard motivator that will at least nudge people’s minds to consider political alternatives.

It has been suggested to me that a bearer of bad news cannot expect to get very far politically. Such is the standard and true. From my perspective, however, what is being delivered is not so much bad news, but the option for beginning the political undertaking and creation to counter the bad news. I maintain that this is a noble and positive political undertaking. The challenge becomes somewhat paradoxical, yet do-able.

I welcome your input and thoughts. Thanks for your attention.

(See March 11 coverage by The New Glasgow News, "An Independent Approach")

Press Release, March 6, 2008, Ronin Nomination Meeting Open to Public

The first of several nomination meetings for Central Nova independent candidate, Sebastian Ronin, will be held on March 10, 2008, 7:00 P.M. at Summer Street Industries in New Glasgow. Further nomination meetings are planned for River John, Antigonish, Guysborough and Sheet Harbour.

“The nice thing about being an independent is that all voting age residents of Central Nova make up the riding association, so to speak,” explained Mr. Ronin. “I am not limited by party factions to seek the 100 signatories for the nomination papers. Actually doing grass roots democracy is much more challenging than merely mouthing it.”

Mr. Ronin will outline his platform for the pending federal election at the March 10 meeting and explain what he sees to be the role of an independent candidate in Central Nova. Time allowing, he will also show the DVD documentary “A Crude Awakening” which deals with the issue of peak oil. There will also be a question and answer session.

“The global supply of oil has hit peak,” claims Mr. Ronin. “This will spawn social crises of unforeseen proportions and no one, not from our political leaders to the individual on the street, is acknowledging it nor is prepared for it.”

One of Mr. Ronin’s major planks is the creation of a new regional federal political party recognizing the bioregion of Atlantica to address the social and eco-political shifts that will be brought about by the global depletion of oil.

“This will be a century of hurt and major transformation,” says Mr. Ronin. “It will not be a fatuous prance through a meadow of sunflowers. Peak oil obviously trumps global warming, without detracting from the seriousness of that issue. As for any potential role that I may play in Central Nova politics, that will only be as interesting and productive as the electorate wishes it and allows it to be.”

The NDP is the only official party which has welcomed Mr. Ronin’s entry into the Central Nova democratic process. John Guthro, President of the Pictou Centre NDP, informed Mr. Ronin by email that his candidacy “is an important addition to the race.”

“Although I welcome it, I have to wonder why the NDP would make an overture to an eco-Libertarian independent,” muses Mr. Ronin. “I’m such a small political gnat, yet it would seem to me that some wagons are being circled behind the scenes to deal with possible tactical fall-out. Should the electorate choose to turn me loose, Central Nova could well become the most interesting riding of the election.”


-30-

A Crude Awakening: The End of Devil's Tears