Middlebury Campus, April 10, 2008

“Thoughtful Vermonters, opposed to the tyranny of the United States government, corporate America, and globalization, believe that Vermont should once again become an independent republic, as it was between 1777 and 1791, and that the United States of America should begin to peacefully dissolve,” reads an excerpt from Secession: How Vermont And Other States Can Save Themselves From The Empire, a new book by retired Duke University economics professor Thomas Naylor.    

Though such ideology may at first register as outlandish, the prospect is not without a sizable contingent of supporters. In the 2006 Vermonter Poll conducted by the University of Vermont, 8 percent of registered voters expressed a favorable opinion of the proposal.    

Among the proposition’s most vocal proponents are author Kirkpatrick Sale – founder of the Middlebury Institute – and teacher and writer Dr. Rob Williams, editor of Vermont Commons.    

In interviews with The Campus, Sale and Williams discussed the nuts and bolts of secession.

The Middlebury Campus: Do you believe the United States is a collapsing empire? If so, why?

Kirkpatrick Sale: Yes. Isn’t it obvious? It has botched every area it’s involved in, and is unable to solve, much less even address, most of the multiple crises that assault the earth today. I shouldn't have to enumerate them, but off the top of my head I'll give you: extinction of species, climate change, pollution of air, water and soils, exhaustion of fisheries, desertification, disruption of the atmosphere, the emiseration of the great part of the world, the malignancy of capitalism, and the stultification and dumbing-down of industrial society.

TC: In the Spring 2008 issue of Vermont Commons you wrote that "the United States is no longer a republic governed by its citizens, but an empire that is essentially ungovernable." Can you elaborate and provide evidence?

Rob Williams: Sure. The U.S. possesses close to 10,000 nuclear weapons, maintains a military presence in more than 130 out of 193 countries globally, spends more money on our military budget than the next eight nations combined, and is quite vocal about pursuing a policy of "full spectrum dominance" to control the entire world and outer space. At home, the size of the average Congressional district is roughly 620,000 citizens (the population of Vermont), while multinational corporations own – through extensive lobbying efforts over the past several decades – both major political parties at the national level. No one in her right mind could argue for a moment that maintaining a democracy or a republic is possible under these sorts of circumstances.

TC: What are the most significant changes Vermont would incur in the event of successful secession?

KS: An independent Vermont would operate at a scale where real democracy would be possible, where it would be able to shield itself from the errors, incompetence, and corruption of the federal government, where it could guide its own economy toward egalitarian ends and where its citizens would have essential control over the decisions that affect their lives.

RW: We'd have to restructure our economy and our political system to engage the rest of the world on our own terms, instead of as one of 50 states within the U.S. Empire. The list of questions is long - and we've been writing about solutions and answers in the newspaper for three years now.

TC: How would Vermont's new government be arranged?

RW: This is a decision for the citizens of Vermont to make, but I imagine Vermont's new government will retain many of the elements that have made Vermont so successful to date: elected representatives from each town or region convening in a statewide assembly, with local elected officials doing the good work of town and school governance. We also have a perfectly good state constitution which would make a nice foundation for an independent republic.

TC: Do you believe national and world opinion would be on Vermont's side in the event of secession?

KS: Without question. Secession is the overwhelming wave of world politics, and has been for half a century, so there are a great many secessionist states in the world. Moreover, if the citizens voted fairly and heavily for it, that would make it indisputably moral in the eyes of the world.

RW: Absolutely. I think that most of the world's nations and peoples recognize that the U.S. Empire is a hyper-power that has betrayed its own ideals. The U.S. has become similar to the Empire our Founding Fathers and Mothers seceded from back in 1776.

TC: Do you see any disadvantages to secession?

KS: Not if it is peaceful and majoritarian. None at all.

RW: Certainly there are risks involved. We advocate non-violence, and propose that we gradually “absent” ourselves from the U.S. Empire. But there is no telling how the U.S. government will respond.

TC : Do you believe secession is a feasible goal? Do you see it coming to fruition? And within what time frame?

KS: It is certainly feasible, and as the empire collapses and things become a lot worse, it will stand out across the land as the only reasonable way to go. In the face of peak oil, for example, and climate disasters and rising oceans, it will be seen as not only feasible, but necessary for survival.

RW: Indeed, it is a feasible goal, just like the British colonies' desire to secede from the British Empire and form new and independent governments ultimately proved a feasible goal. Gauging the time frame is tricky. It really depends on how quickly Vermonters wake up to the fact that remaining in the U.S. Empire is a high-risk proposition.

TC: If secession does not pan out, what other means exist to remedy the problems you perceive to face Vermont?

RW: We focus much of our Vermont Commons work on what we call “re-localization” efforts – how do we decentralize our political, economic and social lives to maximum effect?

TC: How do most people you encounter respond to the secession campaign? Do they take it seriously?

KS: Most people I talk to seem to feel it is a very good idea, but not attainable, until I tell them about the disasters we are in now and how they're only getting worse, and [that] the national government is the problem, not the solution. Then they begin to see the point.

RW: We get all sorts of responses, from anger to laughter to genuine interest. I think more and more thoughtful citizens are realizing that the days of the U.S. Empire are numbered, and that it is up to us to develop alternatives to empire here in Vermont.

TC: What is at stake for you personally in this movement?

KS: Nothing. In fact, it’s costing me a good deal of money. I don't even live in a state that has or is likely to have a secessionist movement [ed. note: Sale resides in New York State]. I do this because I think it is the only way to avert the disaster of the Empire.

RW: I have poured countless hours into this effort over the past four years. For me, it is really about creating a more hopeful 21st-century world for ourselves and our children and their children. Time will tell.