Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Brexit: Dividing the Indivisible

 The EU and the Union flags fly outside The European Commission Representation in the United Kingdom in central London January 23, 2013. Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron promised on Wednesday to give Britons a referendum choice on whether to stay in the European Union or leave if he wins an election in 2015, placing a question mark over Britain's membership for years. REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth (BRITAIN - Tags: POLITICS) - RTR3CU5Jhttp://www.campusreform.org/img/CROBlog/6635/Oppression-Flags.jpg

In his first Inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln explained his moral justification for invading the Southern States. Plainly, he said, “the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy.” He reasoned that if a State can lawfully secede from the Union, so can a part of that part and a part of that part, on down to one individual and the dissolution of all political authority. This was a stock argument deduced from what philosopher Michael Oakeshott called the idea of a modern European state. In this kind of state political order requires a central authority conceived of as an artificial corporation vested with plenary power over individuals in a territory. Thomas Hobbes (1651) was the first to describe the modern state as an artificial man.

What is peculiar about this sort of state, whether liberal, socialist, communist, or fascist, is that it frowns on independent social authorities within its borders such as an independent church, an order of nobility, tribes, free cities, provinces, independent educational institutions, independent banking, an independent currency, and the like. As a practical matter, the modern state must tolerate some of these, but its disposition is to eliminate them if possible, or more likely to draw their teeth by incorporating (and co-opting) them as agencies of central power.

This disposition to total control by hollowing out independent social authorities is a feature of all modern states whether liberal, socialist, communist, or fascist.


  1. No offence old friend but I find the comparrison between Benefit and the secession of the American South a bit disingenuous. The EU was founded in order to draw France and Germany closer together. Three devastating wars in 70 years had been enough. It's mechanisms were intended to limit German economic and political power. Many of the nation's that also joined also desired this and also signed on to the knowledge that preexisting exit structures were built in.

    So now fourth years on German Central Power again dominates Europe. Again dictating economic authority over smaller states as they did to Serbia in 1914. Dare to disagree with the central authority and call for a referendum to withdraw and your freely elected government is replaced by EU appointed technocrats. They did it to Greece twice so far. They've done it to Italy once. With the deepening banking crisis in Italy they are going to try and do it again. Except this time the Italians are giving the Germans the big middle finger just as the Brits just did. The Germans twice tried to conquer all of Europe.Twice they failed. This third attempt is failing as well. As it justly should. Economic slavery is just as pernicious and destructive as political slavery or human bondage.

    1. I believe all the good Dr. was stating is that anyone and any entity should be free to join and leave whatever.