Vermont: The Switzerland of North America

[Leader Desslock]

Here's a fun one I stumbled across - the vermont Secessionist movement:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070604/ap_on_re_us/vermont_secession

I have to say they probably raise some good points. I know that during one of the Quebecois secession votes, there were a lot of people saying that Maine should secede and join the separated maritime provinces of Canada that would've been broken off if the Quebec vote had succeeded, which it never does. Maine's got more in common with the maritime provinces than it does with the rest of the US anyway. And I don't think New Hampshire would strongly object to a secession of the northern New England states, either.

Yes it's crazy, and it'll never happen - but behind it all, a lot more people than you might realize see some perfectly legitimate points to the movement.

[animeotaku99]

If they succeed then that is treason and lots of people will be hunted down... but maybe North Dakota should Seed to Canada, teh nmaybe people here will be more open and accepting

[Suiko Eiji]

I actually saw an article from the Boston Globe on it this morning and found the read to be farily enjoyable. I even ended up going back and doing some reading about the First Vermont Republic from 1777-91.

Not the first time I'd heard about this, though; there was actually a member of the forums here who has a link to the Second Vermont Republic in their signature and I remember reading it a couple of years ago.

If they succeed then that is treason and lots of people will be hunted down...

The legality of secession has never been challenged even though it technically could be considered a treasonous act. I guess it depends on where the new alliances may end up; if you have a succession movement that wants to remain diplomatically close to the US and its allies then it would go over much better than the secession movement that would side against the remaining Union.

[Bernard_Monsha]

Vermont cannot succeed the only state that can after the civil war is Texas. Still Vermont is like Luxemburg, people drive through it but find no reason to stop.

[Nialo931]

I spent some time in the country parts of Vermont as a kid and found it quite enjoyable there and wouldn't mind going back, though not if I have to take a passport to get in.

[Mort]

Yes it's crazy, and it'll never happen - but behind it all, a lot more people than you might realize see some perfectly legitimate points to the movement.

Some of the reasons are good but I also came across the 9-11 conspiracy stuff on a couple the links. That makes me think that most of the people in the movement are more anti-bush then true diehards for the movement and once Bush is gone it will die down to nothing again.

[Leader Desslock]

Some of the reasons are good but I also came across the 9-11 conspiracy stuff on a couple the links. That makes me think that most of the people in the movement are more anti-bush then true diehards for the movement and once Bush is gone it will die down to nothing again.
Actually, I remember having a spirited discussion on the merits of Maine's secession back in high school. This was a decade before Dubya was even governor of Texas, much less the President of the US.

Folks from northern New England have felt disconnected from mainstream US culture since well before I was born. This is not a new movement, and even if it was, it's not built upon a new sentiment.

If Maine seceded from the US to join a new republic formed with the eastern Canadian provinces, I'd move back home in a heartbeat.

[Mort]

Folks from northern New England have felt disconnected from mainstream US culture since well before I was born. This is not a new movement, and even if it was, it's not built upon a new sentiment.

The main reason I said this was that the statements reminded me of the people after the 2000 and 2004 election saying that they were moving to Canada if Bush won. Didn't know the movment was that old either.

[CrossboneGundam]

The legality of secession has never been challenged even though it technically could be considered a treasonous act. I guess it depends on where the new alliances may end up; if you have a succession movement that wants to remain diplomatically close to the US and its allies then it would go over much better than the secession movement that would side against the remaining Union.

Legality isn't an issue. Either way the US military will come in and forcibly take back control.

[Leader Desslock]

The main reason I said this was that the statements reminded me of the people after the 2000 and 2004 election saying that they were moving to Canada if Bush won.
I seriously researched that option after the 2004 elections. The 2000 election result was merely embarassing for me; the 2004 result wasa severe blow to my faith in the Union. I'm not even remotely joking or exaggerating when I say this. I actually researched, in depth, for some length of time, the option of renouncing my US citizenship and becoming a Canadian citizen. Not an expatriate American citizen, but a Canadian citizen.

After looking into my options for a week or two, I decided that if every person who believed in the principles of the Republic renounced their citizenship at the first sign of trouble, then this little experiment would've ended a long time ago. The ideals upon which this country was founded are worth fighting for. That fight isn't necessarily overseas, and it's not necessarily fought with bullets. This is a different kind of fight, and it's being fought on a different kind of battlefield. And because it's still a fight worth fighting, I've still got my US passport, rather than the maple leaf.

I'm not trying to start a whole "Bash Bush" thread at all. This idea precedes Bush by years and decades. I'm actually on-topic when I comment that the people pushing the secession movement are those who probably think that mainstream US government and culture have passed some sort of Point Of No Return. They respect and appreciate the ideals upon which the Republic was founded, but they don't believe them applicable to the current state of the nation. Folks from outside might brand them traitors, but they certainly wouldn't see themselves that way. They'd see themselves as trying to keep the national ideals alive and in practice - simply in an environment where they can still be effective.

Legality isn't an issue. Either way the US military will come in and forcibly take back control.
I've heard the same sentiment expressed regarding any possible secession (from Canada) by Quebec.

[Bernard_Monsha]

I'm not trying to start a whole "Bash Bush" thread at all. This idea precedes Bush by years and decades. I'm actually on-topic when I comment that the people pushing the secession movement are those who probably think that mainstream US government and culture have passed some sort of Point Of No Return. They respect and appreciate the ideals upon which the Republic was founded, but they don't believe them applicable to the current state of the nation. Folks from outside might brand them traitors, but they certainly wouldn't see themselves that way. They'd see themselves as trying to keep the national ideals alive and in practice - simply in an environment where they can still be effective.

A bunch of pinkos who are mad we won the Cold War and did not turn into a Communist Totalitarian state would be a better description. Comparing Vermont to any other state is like saying San Fransisco is representative or rural California.

[Soluzar]

A bunch of pinkos who are mad we won the Cold War and did not turn into a Communist Totalitarian state would be a better description. Comparing Vermont to any other state is like saying San Fransisco is representative or rural California.
In my opinion, it would be more true to say that while the Soviet Union lost the Cold War, America did not win. There's a subtle difference there.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

In my opinion, it would be more true to say that while the Soviet Union lost the Cold War, America did not win. There's a subtle difference there.

No way! We won, evident by the fact for the next two decades the world was OUR *****.

IF YOU NEED FURTHER PROOF. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=cwuCChCEJIs)

[Victory]

This paragraph is pure ...IN AMERICA!
"I always thought the Civil War settled that," said Russell Wheeler, a constitutional law expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. If Vermont fought and won a war with the federal government, "then you could say Vermont proved the point. But that's not going to happen."
You got your lawyer, your constitution, your civil war and you can almost hear the bombs dropping already!

Also I think quebec has had two votes already and they both failed...

[Sauron]

You got your lawyer, your constitution, your civil war and you can almost hear the bombs dropping already!


If I recall, doesn't Vermont import a vast majority of its electricity in order to stay 'Green'? Quality of living would take quite a hit.

[Suiko Eiji]

Legality isn't an issue. Either way the US military will come in and forcibly take back control.

I would be inclined to agree with you. When I said that "legality hasn't been challenged", I meant just that. It's open to interpretation whether or not States can freely leave the Union; however, the only time it's seriously come up, the Union declared them rebels and sent the military in.

Using history as precedent, I can see the US military marching towards Burlington but at the same time I also wonder, "All this for Vermont?" :lol:

[Tenou]

I've heard the same sentiment expressed regarding any possible secession (from Canada) by Quebec.
Oh, come on, honestly, once we get rid of Québec do you really think we'd actually fight to get her back?

Besides that, most of Canada has, at some point in time, given serious though to leaving Canada. Québec, of course has always been in the lead, but the Atlantic provinces (who never actually agreed to Confederation) aren't that far behind. Because, hey, everyone hates Ottawa.

But if the Conservatives aren't out of power soon, the Maritimes are going to be giving some serious though to separation and if Vermont backed us up, who knows? Maybe this time we'd win.

Also I think quebec has had two votes already and they both failed...

Well, if you define failure as ballot tampering, then yeah, Separatists lost both referendums. But even with alleged tampering, the 1980 referendum was about 40% for separation and the 1995 referendum was 49.42% (and the Parti Québécois started screaming when they found out there were close to 90 000 rejected ballots). That's not exactly failure. Hell, if it were an election, that's a majority government.

Je me souviens!

[Mort]

But if the Conservatives aren't out of power soon, the Maritimes are going to be giving some serious though to separation and if Vermont backed us up, who knows? Maybe this time we'd win.

Till a MI Abrams comes rolling down the street. Hint if you want to secede make sure you have guns to keep the army out. If any state in the tryed to secede agian there no way the presdent will let a state go for fear that once one goes they all will.

Does any one know of conservatives states with a movment anymore?

[Holy Knight]

Well, if you define failure as ballot tampering, then yeah, Separatists lost both referendums. But even with alleged tampering, the 1980 referendum was about 40% for separation and the 1995 referendum was 49.42% (and the Parti Québécois started screaming when they found out there were close to 90 000 rejected ballots). That's not exactly failure. Hell, if it were an election, that's a majority government.

Je me souviens!

I'm not sure going ahead with Sovereignty even with a 50% vote would be the wisest of choices. For something like that, you'd need at least 80-90%, else you risk splitting the country in two and the movement would fail due to internal strife.

Besides, polls show (aren't we getting a lot of these recently? Are they even representative?) that the population's mood can vary wildly depending on the political climate, as current estimates put wishes of Sovereignty at around 35%, I believe, an all-time low, whereas it was at a much higher percentage just a few months back.

My personal belief on Quebec's Seperatist movement is that it's more of a nostalgic wanton of the 60's than an actual desire. It serves no purpose.

As for Secessionism as a whole, I believe it to be a futile movement. The world seems to be headed towards unification under one world government. Whether that's a good thing or not is open for discussion.

[Victory]

the 1980 referendum was about 40% for separation and the 1995 referendum was 49.42%yeah that's close, hehe! I wonder what would have happened if it had been over 50%

at least in the states there's a firm stance on democracy so you know if those vermonters get too testy the army's going to pull a couple of divisions out and turn Burlington Palace into a smoking crater.

[D the Hunter]

...pull a couple of divisions out and turn Burlington Palace into a smoking crater.

A couple divisions?!?! I could take over Vermont with nothing but a bull horn and a bad attitude. :P

What signifigance does Vermont even have? None! Besides the fact that 50 states, sounds better than 49 and a half. ;)

[Haro!]

Still Vermont is like Luxemburg, people drive through it but find no reason to stop.
Easy Korean girls at University of Vermont are my reason to stop there... I know some people.

Anyway yeah Vermont is a nice place it'd be a shame to lose them if they ever you know decided to make such a move. And by losing them I mean them getting bombed or something.