New Declaration of Independence
August 19th, 2008 by Terence Gillespie
Email this article to a friend
I just completed watching the John Adams mini-series on HBO. I was spellbound during each of the episodes because history is our future and the detail, acting and presentation was so well done in bringing the American History of the Revolution to life. Thanks to my friend Joe M. for the excellent recommendation.
I was struck by how well-spoken the founding fathers were, and had to be, in order to accomplish the monumental tasks of persuasion and law necessary to actually pull off the Revolution. Of course, none of these qualities would have mattered if they weren’t able to win the ensuing war. The mini-series experience made me long for a time when people read books instead of watching TV. It may be naive or overly romantic, but, it seems there was no difference between the founding fathers words and deeds.
Why have ANY difference between a man’s word’s and deeds? Can’t we just refrain from saying what we’re not prepared to do?
So, I was fascinated when listening to one of my favorite talk radio programs, last week, when the program that followed announced an essay contest to create a New Declaration of Independence.
My first reaction was “What’s wrong with the old one?”. As the week went on, though, I started to become more open to the idea and began researching the history and text of the original document. I’m a big fan of words and poetry and lyrics that put things well. But, it is rare to find a document like the Declaration that used words perfectly. It is truly a masterpiece.
About three days ago I started working on a theoretical modern version that would be applicable to the current state of the Union. Not content to work on a mere essay I thought the effort would be much more personally rewarding if it was an actual working document that could be used to capture the current sentiments of the American People, as was Thomas Jeffersons’ goal. I also spent considerable time attempting to be accurate in presenting a plausible context and process that could actually happen and, if so, strive towards a theorhetical bloodless separation.
To make the task even more difficult it is my belief that one has to be extremely careful in breaking one law or oath in pursuit of instituting another. To that end I think it best to adhere to the laws and processes of the existing Constitution with the possible exception of a State attempting to reclaim what was and always has been their original possession: Their own Sovereignty.
I can’t claim to know the sentiments of the American People, but, my research turned up some amazing facts about the State of Vermont and an organization called The Second Vermont Republic. I became convinced that the most likely State in the current Union to secede is, in fact, Vermont. I don’t claim to speak for them and chose them only to present a document whose context is as close as possible to being plausible.
Without further adieu, Here is the Letter of Transmittal (To the Alex Jones show) and the New Declaration that I submitted to the contest:
Mr. Alex Jones, Et. Al.,
I am submitting a Declaration that could actually be used
in accordance with current laws and circumstances.
The only slight chance for a bloodless separation is if the Declaration
come from One single and solitary state. Any hint of confederation of
independant states would give the union trumped up philosophical
grounds for civil war, as they have already proved.
Moreover, as the eyes of the world would be upon us, the task is made
even more difficult in that the document must be written and executed
in a manner that breaks no current laws of the State or Union that it is
submitted to, other than reclaiming their original Sovereignty.
As Vermont is the current State most likely to secede I write this
from the point of view of their actual and mature movement, The Second Vermont
Republic.
After a supermajority in a legislative vote, popular referendum and state
constitutional convention Vermont’s Governor would then be empowered to
present the following declaration to the US Secretary of State. A 2007 poll
shows that 13 percent of Vermonters would opt for it.
Terence Gillespie
In CONGRESS, August 19, 2008,
A DECLARATION
By the REPRESENTATIVES of the
SECOND VERMONT REPUBLIC
In GENERAL CONGRESS Assembled.
It is the Saddest of Occasions and circumstances that impel us to appeal to the tribunal of the world to offer proper justification in seeking separation and independence from the union of the United States of America.
We, here, will place before mankind the common sense of our conclusions in terms so plain and so firm as to command their assent and to justify the drastic measures of the independent stand we are now compelled to take. As we assume separate and equal station among the powers of the earth our authority to do so rests on the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, our inalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and on the harmonizing sentiments of our citizens that these measures are not only justified but, indeed, necessary for our own survival.
The union, to which we have heretofore pledged allegiance and willingly given up the sovereignty of our First Republic, was by all accounts the most noble experiment in Freedom in the history of mankind. We would be remiss to omit acknowledgement of some progress and benefit from the sheer enormity and daringness of the experiment. It is not for this progress and these benefits that we must now separate. But, as when one noble experiment must beget another to remain true to its intended purpose wisdom consists of understanding the time when one should end and the other begin.
In the interest of preserving the purity of our second republic and with respect to our former allegiance to the constitution of the union it is only befitting the dignity and character of our people to separate within the bounds of one law before erecting its successor. So let it be known that we have conspired with no state, sought refuge with no foe, and befriended no foreign state or entity in our second formation. The entire effort springs forth only from the consciousness and dictates of our own citizens and our instincts for self-preservation. If we be viewed as breaking even one part of the constitution it is only to reclaim what was once rightfully ours, and to restore our once and future republic.
Our case is submitted to the union, and to the world, with this partial list of intolerable acts
and circumstances that could only have taken place amidst a sea of treason that hath seized
control of the union.
NOTE: The document goes on to describe a list of grievances that underscore the disconnect between the Constitution of the Union and the current modern day reality. Since I am not an insurrectionist there is no purpose in airing these grievances. I suggest you make your own list and even consider taking small and legal steps to put them forward in a public forum of your own choice.
As for me, the article I’ve written, here, is my own way to bring to light a glimpse of the noble efforts, beliefs and philosophy of our founding fathers as they might appear in a modern context. I can tell you now, from this experience, that my true effort to connect with the sentiments of the founding fathers has been rewarding far beyond expectation. As you may see from my NOTE: above, there is a part of me that could be so thoroughly drawn into a complete empathy with their plight that I felt it necessary to pull back from the exercise. Like a man holding onto the object of his electrocution at least I am comforted in the completeness in the way that I have chosen to feel a portion of what they must have felt, at that time.
May God help us all if too many of the people of our nation should be drawn towards thoughts of separation,
Terence Gillespie
Tags: congress, constitution, independence, Law, Personal, Purpose, United States, US, Values
Last week I saw a “US out of VT” bumper sticker on a van — perhaps this movement has started?