The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Again?

Old Aardvark
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:23 am

Re: The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Again?

Post by Old Aardvark » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:34 am

Will Williams wrote:
Sat Dec 26, 2020 6:29 pm
Old Aardvark wrote:
Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:02 am
I believe it is a matter of time before North and South Carolina split into separate parts. Both states have majority black populations in their eastern coastal areas, and both also have significant black populations in their central regions. Western North Carolina and Upstate South Carolina are still predominantly white...

You've got the right idea, Old Aardvark, but your suggested area for a White secessionist region is limited. I grew up in Raleigh, NC, and east of there generally is known known as Black Carolina and west of Raleigh is generally known as White Carolina. South Carolina may be majority Black by now, but NW SC is majority White. But so is SW Virginia, most of West Virginia and parts of several states that share southern Appalachia. I live in Tennessee now and East TN is White, whereas west of Nashville is Black Tennessee.

This thread about possibilities for Whites seceding from the failed multiracial experiment called the United States and forming its own exclusive region started out on topic but got away from us, as you can see. But go back to the opening posts, and especially to this revealing map:


Image

Notice Kentucky and northern parts of Arkansas, north Georgia and Mississippi, the NE section of Texas even southern parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa. There is practically a White majority corridor down through Alabama and the Florida panhandle to the Gulf of Mexico. Another possible corridor along the NC/SC border to the Atlantic Ocean exists.

Cleansing these areas will be messy business, but there is certainly historical precedent if there is the will in our people to fight and survive in our own exclusive living space in accord with Nature's highest law: preservation. Secession might begin in the historic State of Franklin area and expand outward into other White counties that want to be a part of a new White nation.


Image
I find it interesting that in two of the Southern states with the highest percentage of blacks, Mississippi and South Carolina, you find the most solidarity among whites. Both states are reliably Republican because the numbers of white liberals who vote Democratic is tiny. All whites in Mississippi and South Carolina have a lot of "up-close" experience with blacks and have no illusions about them. Thus over 90 percent of whites stick together politically. As conditions become worse and worse for whites in other areas of the country, those whites will also shed their liberal illusions and discover the necessity of white racial brotherhood.

Chairman Williams, you are no-doubt familiar with Thomas Chittum's "Civil War II: The Coming Breakup of America." Chittum goes into significant detail looking at all the states in the old South particularly and where and how the racial dividing lines will work out. Regarding North Carolina, Chittum notes that the sooner this breakup happens, the further east that dividing line will be, possibly as far east as Raleigh as you say. If the breakup takes a generation longer, then that line could easily move west to line from Greensboro to Charlotte. However the final outcome, it will be an immense amount of bloody, genocidal combat. Had things fallen apart in 1970, whites would have held onto 90 percent of the state easily, and regained the remaining ten percent in short order. Twenty years from now the dividing line might run between Winston-Salem and Gastonia.

User avatar
Grimork
Posts: 677
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:34 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Again?

Post by Grimork » Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:36 am

Old Aardvark wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:13 am
The last thing we will have the manpower and energy for would be quickly moving into the eastern Carolinas and attempting to clear out millions of blacks. I suspect if we leave them to their own devices they will be far less successful than whites will be at maintaining their populations as civilization collapses around them. The more patient we are, the easier it will be to take the lowlands.
As long as it's a future plan, that's good enough for me. I agree with what you've said. In fact a lot of resources will not last, scientists say with more and more of the third world breeding and booming. I've always said that without our medicines and money nature would take it's course in a lot of these areas. Too bad China's economy now seems to be as strong if not stronger than the US now. Although they don't seem too intentioned on taking care of their own especially the lower class.

Nature has its own cure for the blacks, they appear to be the most unhealthy race, not sure if that's lifestyle included or biological. I believe that large numbers wouldve faced extinction without White intervention long ago. They're disease ridden and plagued with conditions such as sickle cell, etc. Even "Covid" is killing more of them.

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 3376
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Again?

Post by Will Williams » Mon Dec 27, 2021 10:49 pm


Talk of secession, some not explicitly racial, has been heating up as America becomes more and more racially polarized.

---


Modern America’s Most Successful Secessionist Movement


In rural Oregon, voters fed up with their state’s leftward turn have embraced a simple and outlandish idea: What if we were just Idaho?
By Antonia Hitchens
December 23, 2021

In the summer of 2015, a chimney sweep in Elgin, Oregon, redrew the map of the American West. “Imagine for a moment Idaho’s western border stretching to the Pacific Ocean,” Grant Darrow wrote in a letter to the editor of his local paper. Rural Oregon, he insisted, should break its ties with the urbanites of Portland and liberals of Salem, and join Idaho. “The political diversity in this state is becoming unpalatable,” he argued. “Rural Oregonians in general and Eastern Oregonians in particular are growing increasingly dismayed by the manner in which Oregon’s Legislature and Oregon’s urban dwellers have marginalized their values, demonized their lifestyle, villainized their resource-based livelihoods, and classified them as second-class citizens at best.”

In the half decade or so since Darrow’s diatribe, a simple and outlandish idea, percolating in rural Oregon since the 1960s—what if we were just Idaho?—has grown into a grassroots secession movement. Last month, Harney County, in the high desert of eastern Oregon, became the state’s eighth to pass a nonbinding ballot measure supporting Darrow’s proposal. Move Oregon’s Border signs now dot the region’s empty highways, and Mike McCarter, a retired agricultural nurseryman and gun-club owner who runs a group pushing for the boundary reshuffle, travels the state in a bright-red trucker hat bearing the slogan. “We don’t care to move, because we’re tied to our land here,” he told me recently. “So why not just allow us to be governed by another state?” He mentioned a supporter so certain that her property will become part of Idaho that she already flies its state flag on her lawn. “We’re going to be Idaho,” she told him.

Scenes from Portland, where Black Lives Matter protesters have sparred with the Proud Boys in paintball brawls over the past year, and worries that liberal lawmakers in Salem will outlaw diesel fuel and artificial insemination of animals, have calcified many rural Oregonians’ sense of total alienation from the west side of the state. “This is not the Oregon I know,” Sandie Gilson, one of Move Oregon’s Border’s “county captains,” told me. “We were farmers and ranchers and loggers. None of those values are left.” Today, half of Oregon’s population lives in the Portland metropolitan area alone. In eastern Oregon, Gilson pays for two emergency helicopter-airlift insurance plans in case she has to go to a hospital hundreds of miles away in Bend or Boise. “That huge drift of country is pretty much nonexistent in the American imagination,” the author William Kittredge wrote about this part of the state in Hole in the Sky, his 1992 memoir of his family’s life on a ranch. “It is hard to exaggerate the vastness of that barren playa. The whole of it—Lake and Harney and Malheur counties in Oregon, each as large as some states in the East—is still populated by no more than a few thousand people.” The geographic point in the continental United States farthest from any interstate lies in Harney County, a contemporary frontier so remote that, in 1990, a pair of census takers went missing for four days in the sagebrush trying to find a person.

Read: The racist history of Portland, the whitest city in America

It’s easy to scoff at the idea of honoring the proposed borders of “Greater Idaho,” not least because it’s almost inconceivable that both Idaho’s and Oregon’s legislatures would sign off on the proposal and send it to Congress for the necessary approval. Many conversations about the subject focus on “freedom” and diesel fuel, breezily dismissing questions of staggering importance in the West—water rights, public lands, the rights of Indigenous people—as details that will be ironed out later. The Greater Idaho proposal would grant Idaho more than three-quarters of Oregon’s land, more than 870,000 of its residents, and access to the ocean; most specifics beyond this have yet to be envisioned. “Idaho fits with what I feel,” Mike Slinkard, a fifth-generation Oregonian who makes high-stealth hunting clothing, told me. “Oregon left us out in the cold. We don’t exist.”

The reasoning comes across as amorphous and quixotic, but the Greater Idaho referendums have passed in eight out of ten counties where they’ve been proposed, making Move Oregon’s Border the most electorally successful secessionist movement in America today. Two more counties will vote on the measure next year, and this month, state Senator Lynn Findley begrudgingly said he’d consider introducing legislation related to the border move. Over the past decade, every state has flirted with a secessionist petition of some sort. Two-thirds of Republicans in the South are in favor of secession; elsewhere, Illinois counties are asking to be free of their directorate in Chicago, and West Virginia has just offered to take in three conservative-leaning, rural Maryland counties. Even this part of Oregon is nestled between areas that some people hope will become entirely new states: the State of Jefferson, in California, and the Liberty State, a libertarian utopia pushed by former Representative Matt Shea, in Washington. The Greater Idaho solution appeals in part because of its political pragmatism; moving a border is hard, but it’s easier than creating a new state.

McCarter, the main organizer behind the ballot measures, lives in a mobile home in La Pine, half an hour south of Bend, the eco-chic outdoor-destination town in central Oregon. When I visited last month, a sign outside his property advertised his concealed-carry-permit business, and an American flag flew above the door. Jason Mraz played on Sirius radio from a TV flanked by two paintings of McCarter’s black Labrador; a Bible and a box of Milk Duds sat on the end table. If the border reflected the lines as McCarter envisions them, Bend, with its cashew milk and Teslas and mandatory masking at craft breweries, would be in a different American state from his home. For McCarter, such a severing is commonsense, and the map of Greater Idaho, carefully carving out Bend, doesn’t look any more puzzling than a gerrymandered congressional district. The urban-rural divide is so intense that separating the two is the most sensible path forward, he told me.

Joining Idaho would keep rural Oregon the way America used to be, McCarter explained. In his narrative, Salem is the villain forcing eastern Oregon counties to comply with laws that seem irrelevant or offensive to their rural setting, rules that have no bearing on their lived reality. Recent redistricting only compounded the sense that representation would never skew in their favor; McCarter feels his supporters’ voices are drowned out by urban ones—the culture over the hill, across the Cascades. Portland is in the midst of its most violent year ever, including more than 1,000 shootings so far. Struggling economically and anticipating the full collapse of industries that used to sustain them, McCarter and his group clamor for popular sovereignty.

Move Oregon’s Border’s true purpose is threefold, McCarter told me: First, obviously, to move the border. Second, to send a message to the state legislature “that you’ve got some very unhappy people, and here are the reasons why.” But the third is more subtle: “It provides a vent for all this anger.” McCarter sees himself as a peaceful guy proximate to violent movements. When he retired from working in plant nurseries and started running a gun club, members of the Oath Keepers, the Three Percenters, and the Project Appleseed prepper group practiced at his shooting range. People’s Rights, the anti-government activist Ammon Bundy’s new far-right network, has asked him to speak at its events. “I know there’s some people that have talked about ‘If this continues on, people are going to pick up their guns,’” McCarter said. “Rural people—their values, the way they live, their faith, their freedom—are closely tied to what Idaho is, so why not adjust the border? Just let us go peacefully.”

That this part of the world would find secession and separatism so compelling makes sense, Richard Kreitner, a historian and the author of Break It Up: Secession, Division, and the Secret History of America’s Imperfect Union, told me. The idea of separation as a solution to intractable political disputes is part of the history of Oregon; even at its formation, some were certain that it would eventually fragment or join California. Perhaps we needn’t be so precious about redrawing borders, Kreitner told me. “State lines aren’t written in stone, and the Oregon proposal shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand,” he said. “The idea of secession is being normalized in an unwinding and degrading country … This is considered a peace proposal, or a way to avoid war.”

Read: When rich places want to secede

Greater Idaho supporters I met often articulated the movement’s aims in the same terms McCarter and Kreitner used. “This is actually very American, choosing our own government,” Gilson, the county captain, told me. “It was all about choosing our government when we left England in the Revolutionary War.” Some proponents of Greater Idaho swiftly offer another American revolution—or another civil war—as the backup plan if moving the border doesn’t work out. The aesthetic of armed politics is still ingrained in recent memory in eastern Oregon; just five years ago, in Harney County, Bundy led a 41-day armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge that led to a standoff with the federal government. (The state police shot and killed LaVoy Finicum, a leader of the occupation, at a roadblock between the refuge and the nearby town of John Day; they claim he was reaching for a gun.) Eighty-five percent of people in Harney County carry a concealed weapon.
---

For photos, recommended reading, etc., from liberal Atlantic magazine article, see here: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ket-newtab
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Jim Mathias
Posts: 2614
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Again?

Post by Jim Mathias » Tue Dec 28, 2021 10:58 pm

Like most anything else, secession is possible. And like most anything else, starting small within a community and expanding messaging capabilities to where ideas that can be accomplished in direct proportion to those messaging abilities can accomplish small victories. These victories then add up to a momentum that can be hard to stop.
Activism materials available! ===> Contact me via PM to obtain quantities of the "Send Them Back", "NA Health Warning #1 +#2+#3" stickers, and any fliers listed in the Alliance website's flier webpage.

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 3376
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: The Secessionist State of Franklin -- Can it Happen Agai

Post by Will Williams » Wed Jul 13, 2022 1:46 pm

Bump!

Sure it can happen again with the way things are going in this country these days. The State of Franklin is now the 1st Congressional District of Tennessee.

---
Will Williams wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:52 pm
Will Williams wrote:This article is not from the Industrial Age, but perhaps we can form a new section for Secessionist Movements.

http://www.northcarolinahistory.org/com ... /218/entry

The State of Franklin: Mountain Secession and Independent Thought

In North Carolina, regionalism has existed since day one. In August 1784, western North Carolinians established the State of Franklin—“the only de facto state that functioned in every aspect of statal power,” writes historian Samuel Cole Williams. After a civil war in the mountains, however, the “Lost State of Franklin” ceased in February 1789.

During the 1780s, North Carolina was under the Articles of Confederation (the Constitution was drafted in 1787 and ratified by all 13 original colonies by 1789). At that time, “western North Carolina” stretched from the Appalachian Mountains to the Mississippi River.


http://ricktylerforcongress.com/tenness ... n-now/Soon after the establishment of the state of North Carolina in 1776, North Carolina mountaineers believed the state government always looked eastward. The irresponsive government of North Carolina angered those in the transmontane region (most lived along the Watauga and Nolichucky rivers); it offered no protection from the dangers of the frontier and used taxes to benefit primarily the eastern part of the state. Plus, Franklinites later argued, its seat was too far away for western North Carolinians to send delegates for timely representation.

These problems irritated mountaineers more, when they remembered that they shouldered the onerous burden of fighting to secure western land—land that the state sold to pay off its Revolutionary War debt. In particular, after the “Land Grab Act” (c. 1783) opened western land for sale, western North Carolinians alleged land warrant fraud; legislators and their business partners acquired land warrants for three of the four million acres sold.

The State of Franklin received its first breath in 1784, when the North Carolina legislature ceded its land to the federal government. Already upset with their state government, Washington, Sullivan, and Greene countians, in what would become Tennessee, decided to start their own state and stretch its borders westward and issue land warrants. Meanwhile, angry North Carolina voters replaced their representatives with a legislative body that repealed the act of cession.

Image
The State of Franklin in Upper East Tennessee

Although North Carolina did not recognize its statehood, Franklin operated for almost five years like any other state. It granted, for example, land warrants and marriage licenses and built roads. Franklin leaders even negotiated treaties with the Cherokee and in the state’s waning days, they sought to be annexed by Spain. John Sevier, a former leader of the Watauga Association (the first autonomous white government in the British colonies) and leader of the Wataugans at the Battle of King’s Mountain, served as the first governor.

After a series of problems, including a congressional rejection for statehood and warfare with the Cherokee, many in Franklin, under the direction of John Tipton, called for a return to North Carolina. The denouement in Franklin’s story was in 1788, when a North Carolina sheriff seized Sevier’s property for back taxes. The Franklin Army marched to Tipton’s home where a skirmish, called the Battle of Franklin, ensued. Later arrested for treason and jailed in Morganton, Sevier was rescued by his followers who tried to form, south of the French Broad River, what they called Lesser Franklin.

In February 1789 the leaders of Franklin pledged allegiance to North Carolina. The Tar Heel State, now rid of its competition, ceded its western land to the United States and thereby acquired authority over all legal claims to North Carolina land warrants.

The State of Franklin provided the nucleus of Tennessee, established in 1796. John Sevier was its first governor.

Many have criticized the Franklinites and their act of secession. But they embodied the noble spirit of the American Revolution. These western North Carolinians tried, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, to “abolish a destructive government” that had abused their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and tried to “institute [a] new Government” that was most likely to “effect their Safety and Happiness.”

By Troy L. Kickler, founding director of the North Carolina History Project
See Also:
Related Categories: Places, Early America, Colonial North Carolina
Timeline: 1776-1835
Tennessee Secession Now! East Tennessee anyway!

Excerpt:
Why Not Tennessee?

If we fail to go the way of secession, our inevitable fate will be abject bondage and tyranny. History has proven that the Anti-Federalists were justified and prescient in their concerns. Centralization and concentration of power always leads to excess and abuse. Man simply cannot be too meticulous or dutiful in his quest to guard against the reflexive tendency toward tyrannical excess on the part of government. The status quo has gone so far beyond the pale of reason and legitimacy that profound and dramatic corrective action are both urgent and mandatory.

The secession phenomenon must have a point of genesis and commencement. Tennessee would seem to be the most logical flash point for such history-altering activity to occur. The following points of observation are relevant in this regard:

First...among conservative Southern states, Tennessee retains the highest percentage of Caucasian representation in its population base.

Second...Tennessee’s rich history features the distinction of being known as the Volunteer State...an inspiring reference to the amazing character of our great ancestors who made inordinate sacrifices on behalf of liberty at the Alamo.

Third...we are the native soil of men such as Crockett, Forrest, and Jackson...individuals who, in their own critical hour of history, set the standard for rising to the occasion and holding the line against immeasurable odds.

On a practical and tangible level, Tennessee also weighs in with readily observable attributes and characteristics. Geographically, we are centrally located in what would be likely to evolve into the New Confederacy. Our topography, climate, and natural resources are all favorable and constitute a strong allure for the attraction and drawing in of potential future inhabitants of a desirable nature and quality.

http://ricktylerforcongress.com/tenness ... ssion-now/
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

Post Reply