NH Secession Featured in Washington Post

TheUnionisDissolvedjpg-2291358_p9[1]Free State Project founder Jason Sorens was published in the Washington Post today, asking the question, “Where Scotland failed, could New Hampshire succeed?”. As it stands, approximately one in four Americans support their state seceding from the U.S., which is an excellent starting point to begin a discussion on the issue. The more we can talk about the idea of seceding, the more realistic it will become, so now is a great time to talk to friends, family, and co-workers about what happened in Scotland and why we need to seriously consider the same thing here.

While the Reuters poll on secession shows New Englanders being the least likely to support secession (19%), we all know that Granite Staters are not of the same mindset as the rest of New England. Unfortunately, the poll does not break out individual states’ responses. Hopefully we’ll see a NH-only poll conducted at some point in the future. Meantime, we need more liberty-loving people to move here as part of the Free State Project and for people to start discussions with loved ones about this idea. The Foundation for New Hampshire Independence has some good outreach information on the idea. Let’s make it a reality!

Here’s Sorens’ editorial:

On Thursday, a majority of Scots voted against independence from the United Kingdom. Their desire for self-determination, though, is easy to understand: The same impulse motivates present-day demands for federalism and state autonomy in the United States. Over the past decade, for instance, the Free State Project has been drawing libertarians to the relatively libertarian-friendly state of New Hampshire to pursue smaller government. Could New Hampshire or another state (one in fourAmericans want their state to secede, according to a poll last week) ever hold its own vote on independence?


From the perspective of the libertarians, there are good reasons for frustration with the federal government. The United States is a very large country and, as Francis Fukuyama noted in “America in Decay,” a recent essay for Foreign Affairs magazine, the nation’s massive size and clunky institutions have made the country less and less governable. Bureaucratic “kludge” continues to grow. The number of pages in the federal register, one indicator of regulatory burden, had grown to over 80,000 in 2013, a quadrupling over the 1970 figure. The United States’ economic freedom ranking in the world has fallen from second in 2000 to nineteenth in 2011. Its government now enjoys the twin ignominies of incarcerating andshooting dead more of its own citizens per capita than any other industrialized country, by far, even though its violent crime rate is notmuch above average.


Political scientists have found that more populous countries are more decentralized, because government becomes less and less effective over larger populations. Spain, Britain, Belgium, Italy and Canada have all decentralized over the past 50 years. But the United States has gone in the opposite direction. In 1913, according to Census Bureau data, local governments raised 56 percent of all taxes in the United States, and state governments another 12 percent. Today, those numbers have flipped: The federal government raises more than 55 percent of all taxes, and local governments account for only 15 percent.


A more workable country would let state and local governments go their own way on more policies, but a more just country would also be based firmly on the principle of free association. Free association is the original American way. The country was founded on an act of secession.


Consider New Hampshire’s possible future. While the Free State Project does not endorse independence for New Hampshire – or any specific legislation – its “Statement of Intent” endorses government limited strictly to protecting people’s rights. Free Staters generally support more autonomy for the state. If the federal government won’t let New Hampshire opt out of the vast federal Leviathan, then what? New Hampshire joined the union on condition that it remain a fully sovereign state free to break the tie with the United States if that link were no longer in its interest.Article 7 of the New Hampshire Constitution declares that “the people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled.” Banning secession would break this original agreement.


On some level, Washington must know this. If Texas, Vermont or Alaska wanted to break away to pursue distinctly conservative or progressive policies within a basically just, liberal, democratic regime, then what? It seems unlikely that the U.S. government would use force against Americans guilty of nothing but believing in government by literal consent of the governed. More likely, it would make the same choice the British government made for Scotland: let the people vote.


For now, there are no serious secessionist movements. No state has the sense of distinct nationality that Scots enjoy, and Puerto Rico, which has the cultural prerequisites for nationalism, derives immense economic benefits from union. Even now, independence is not ideal for New Hampshire. We Granite Staters can still hope for broader self-government before anybody discusses striking out on our own.

But 30 or 60 years from now, a U.S. government that had lost military predominance to China and India while keeping up increasingly centralized and sclerotic institutions could well face a serious secessionist challenge from a state such as New Hampshire. To prevent secession, the U.S. government will not use force; it will have to devolve power.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. LMAO. You’re a fucking moron, Bernard. Which poll showed 25% of Americans want their state to secede? There is no such credible poll. You and your fucking freetard friends need to pick up your shit and get out of NH because you’re not wanted here.

  2. Try to do something about it, slavetard pussy.

  3. Sorry to burst your bubble Bane, but there’s only going to be more of the secessionists type moving to NH. You should consider moving to a state more in line with your views somewhere like New York, or California. That way your craddle to grave gubment can take care of you bub.

  4. Seems like the logical step to make this happen would be to get ballot referendums in NH, like Colorado getting weed legalized, it seemed like such a longshot only a few years ago, but it could happen.

  5. What credible evidence do you have to back your claim that you represent the “majority”? Oh yeah, conjecture and fantasy, the cornerstones of the statist mentality. Nice try.

  6. New Hampshire doesn’t have referendums. The only direct legislation by the People at the State level would be approving/denying Constitutional amendments.

    So, the first step in any serious talk of secession would have to be establishing a procedure, since none currently exists. Writing up a model secession law would be an interesting thought experiment, if nothing else.

  7. Bane may actually have a point. Is Reuters a credible news agency? If Reuters is reporting 25%, then I’d venture to say it could be closer to 50%.

  8. No problem, pedophile. I do something about every time I vote.

  9. You mean you ask bureaucrats to do something every time you vote?

  10. Oh, yeah … about that. For over 11 years now we’ve all been hearing about the “20,000” people moving to NH as part of the freetard movement. There are now something like 1,600 people that are here self-identifying themselves as freetards. So at that rate, in approximately 137 years or so you will have your 20,000 freetards in NH.

  11. The fact that the status quo that I agree with remains the same tells me I’m part of the majority, freetard. You morons have had zero success in changing anything, because the majority of voters don’t agree with you.

  12. I think by definition there is no such thing as an “unbiased” new agency, therefore credibility is in the eyes of the beholder. If CNN or Fox conducted the same poll and the findings were opposite of the Reuters poll … then you would have Fucktard Bernard screaming bloody murder about how “biased” those polls were.

  13. Which means that NH will never have a vote to secede. Game-set-match.

    Why does the freetard project think that those of us who already live here are just going to roll over and play dead over something like this? It’s silly.

  14. I’m not attracted to children, shit-for-brains.

    You’re obviously a masochist. When are you going to physically attack one of us, and thereby force him (or her) to pistol-whip you (thereby knocking out your front teeth) in self-defense?

  15. Your beloved USD is going to crash and burn, retard. Your asinine mob rule is irrelevant.

    You will pay dearly for your blind worship.

  16. Your house of cards is unsustainable, scum.

  17. You shouldn’t criticize your presstitute buddies like that. They work hard to maintain the status quo that self-hating peons like you crave.

  18. Why do losers like you think that you can stave off the inevitable collapse?

  19. Why do pedophiles like you keep hoping for a collapse – do you think there will be no more laws and you can do what you do without being arrested?

  20. Right, right – whatever, pedophile. Thanks for taking time away from jerking off to images of little boys in your parents’ basement. Do they know what you do all day down there?

  21. Sure, Sure – whatever, pedophile. Thanks for taking time away from jerking off to images of little boys in your parents’ basement. Do they know what you do all day down there?

  22. Something tells me you are attracted to children, you pathetic douche.

  23. You’re demonstrating that hardcore statism is associated with being a shit wipe: we’ve never met, and you’ve made an unsubstantiated accusation against me.

    You suffer from a mental illness, statist swine.

  24. I haven’t lived with my parents since I was 18, cowardly, murderous (by proxy) scum.

    SInce you’re such a masochist, perhaps you’d like to visit me so that I can beat you in self-defense.

  25. You’re projecting, masochist loser.

    Are you ready for your curb stomping yet?

  26. Something tells me that you’ve made this accusation four times on this page in an effort to divert attention from your attraction to children.

  27. Credibility is not in the eye of the beholder. If someone is misinforming or lying, and we both believe them, that doesn’t mean they are credible.

    I don’t know about “Fucktard Bernard,” but all of the bloggers here seem very even-tempered. They’d be the last ones screaming bloody murder about anything, even when given good reason to.

  28. LoL … sure. Give me your mane and address … or should I just look you up on the registered sex offender list?

  29. i would like to see your evidence about this inevitable collapse. if it has to do with the national debt, I’m going to stop you right there. There are several countries who’s debt is several times greater then their GDP. they have no collapsed. so what other evidence do you have?

  30. why should he have to move away because others are invading and occupying his state? sounds very against the NAP.

  31. You don’t get it, Bane. He wasn’t even talking about FSP. As the government becomes increasingly oppressive, more people will naturally snap out of their hypnosis and seek places like NH to make a stand. Oh yes, this is only the beginning. I think that’s what upsets you and your ilk.

    But maybe some of you will snap out of your own hypnosis and find that we aren’t so different, and maybe even friends standing side-by-side in the fight for freedom.

  32. If what you said is true–that it’s actually “his state,” then I doubt you would have any difficulty stopping any invasion or occupation: just show them the deed with Bane’s name on it. Whatever else you want to say about freestaters, they’re pretty respectful of private property rights. That fact that nobody’s doing that is strong evidence that what you said is false, not true.

  33. It’s going to be mighty entertaining when someone gets around to suing Bane for defamation. He’s engaging in some seriously illegal conduct and posting it publicly where he cannot delete it nor the record of his IP number. All someone has to do is to notarize a printout of his comments, file a complaint and it’s game over. He won’t even get as far as a jury before the court enters summary judgment against him. I wonder how much money he has. It seems unlikely anyone with his, um, social skills owns a valuable house or car but you never know. And if he’s too deadbeat to pay the judgment that will really fuck his life up forever.

  34. I’ve invited you to PorcFest numerous times. You can make your false accusations in person there.

  35. Fiat currencies have collapsed before. They’re not sustainable.

  36. private security has been tried before (google pinkertons) and that has failed. Alternate currencies has been tried before ( banks used to issue their own money, close to Bitcoin idea) and that has failed, Voluntaryist society has actually been tried but failed with in a few years. however on this point of currencies being unsustainable, i would like to see some actual proof for your forecasting

  37. trying to get 20,000 people to move somewhere with the sole purpose of trying to get a state to leave the nation. this would be to over throw the current government. that would define these “20,000” as a invading force.

  38. You might characterize it as such, but it would be a stretch unless (a) their planned strategy is to use military force and (b) they are all acting under the orders of a single, unified command structure. But that is irrelevant to freestaters who have no express goal of overthrowing anything. In fact many if not most freestaters are flag-waving patriots whose loyalty to U.S.A. would have been mainstream a few decades ago. Their objection is to the radical extremism of the factions in control of the Federal regime for the past generation or so.

    None of which suggests Bane is at any risk of being molested in the quiet enjoyment of his private property by freestaters, much less the Free Teen movement.

  39. i do remember hearing about a welcome basket that contained a box of ammo, they associate with people known to call for armed conflict, someone who will remain nameless did call for people with military training to come and join them and share training with them.

    Is free staters not trying to get N.H. so succeed from the U.S.?

  40. Right, right. So if I just go around and ask for the pedophile, everyone will know who you are, or will there be so many to choose from I’ll need another piece of information to narrow down my request?

  41. We already have freedom, honey – just not your skewed version of it. You don’t even live in NH, which makes your comments even more laughable.

  42. I don’t know whether what you’re saying is true or not since you’re concealing the information necessary to confirm it, but assuming you’re correct:
    (1) A welcome basket containing ammo is no more a call to overthrow the government by force than is a welcome basket containing tomatoes a call to overthrow the government by throwing the tomatoes at elected officials. Otherwise everyone buying ammo would be deemed an enemy of the state, and they are not.
    (2) A particular participant of the FSP “associating” (whatever that means) with a person advocating for policy X, is no more an official endorsement of policy X by the FSP than is Hilter’s vegetarianism indicative of an official policy forbidding the consumption of meat by the Nazi Party. Otherwise all I would have to do is to join as a member of the Democratic National Committee, then be seen in public with a member of ISIS, and it would become an official policy of the Democratic Party to destroy the USA, obviously an absurd conclusion. People can “associate” with whomever they want and it doesn’t turn the opinion of the person they associated with into the policy of whatever group they’re a member of.
    (3) Same for military training. Military training is as likely to be used to defend a government as to attack it. It does not imply a goal of overthrowing anything by the FSP any more than does going to a gun-range on the weekend for some target practice.

    The FSP is very clear about its mission and stated goals, and those are the only goals you can fairly impute to people who participate in the FSP on the basis of that participation. Secession is not one of its goals. I’m quite sure if you took an opinion survey of all FSP members you would find pro-secession to be a minority view, probably a tiny minority.

  43. Chad … let’s put this in context: an “invading force” of societal outcasts who suffer from various psychological problems.

  44. You talk big, but that’s about it. You’re a pathetic joke.

  45. 1) veggies and bullets are two different things. one is designed to wound or kill and the other is designed to go on a burger.
    2)i used the word “associate” as this member is not a free keene blogger but it’s chris cantwell i was talking about. would you like to deny the relationship he has with free keene?

    3) i have heard a lot of talk of N.H. succeeding from FK AND FSP members. so one could draw the conclusion in conjunction with the call for military trained personel (was done by a free keene bloger) that the goal could be unstated but intended none the less.

  46. That’s a good point. Here’s the exact quote you’re referring to from the FAQ:

    Does the Free State Project promote secession?

    No, the Free State Project does not promote secession.


    Thank you for backing me up on that point.

  47. (1) Veggies can be used to support human life by preventing starvation. Bullets can be used to support human life by preventing aggression. Veggies can also be used to hurl at unpopular politicians as has been done in numerous historical examples. Yes, you’re correct they are different things, but insofar as they serve the same purpose they thus are perfectly comparable unless you have some further evidence of the purpose intended by including them in a welcome basket as you allege.

    (2) Yes I am denying an association between Chris Cantwell and the FSP as the FSP formally expelled Cantwell from its participant roster.


    I am also denying an association between Cantwell and Free Keene as he was formally banished from the Free Keene clubhouse.


    Both of which facts are irrelevant since there’s no reason to impute the policy goals of any one individual to every group of which that individual is a member. The United States Marine Corps had an association with Lee Harvey Oswald. Are you prepared to accept the logical conclusion of applying your premise to that fact? The goals of the FSP are the goals of the FSP, the goals of Chris Cantwell are his, FSP participant or not.

    (3) You can draw whatever conclusion you want, but since your conclusion is based on speculation and is contradicted by the express statement regarding secession published on the FSP website, your conclusion is supported by weaker (if any) evidence than the adverse conclusion. In plain terms, there’s no good reason to believe your conclusion is correct (or rather, if there is a good reason you have yet to present it).

Care to comment?