Breaking Bad

America may be the home of the free and the land of the brave but it’s also the domain of the discontented.

We offer as evidence the fact that there are currently five secession movements under way in this country, in California, Colorado, Michigan, Texas and Maryland. The aim for many of them is independent statehood.

Most spring from overwhelmingly white, rural, conservative/ libertarian enclaves. Most of the organizers complain their voices are not being heard. Most believe their political opponents, perhaps enemies is a better word, are violating the nation’s founding principles. Most like to throw around words like “tyranny.”

One of the potential 51st states is in western Maryland whose initiative leader, Scott Strzelczyk , told the Washington Post he and his supporters want to “break away from the dominant ruling class.” Interestingly enough, that was a philosophy espoused by Karl Marx. But we digress.

Strzelczyk said he is frustrated with Maryland’s Democratic Party. “If you don’t belong in their party, you’ll never have your views represented,” he said. “If we have more states, we can all go live in states that best represent us, and then we can get along.”

Meaning his idea of Utopia is a state where everyone thinks alike. And if there are dissenters? I guess they start their own secession movement.

Look, let’s call these movements what they are: Exclusionary politics. While they claim they are being ignored, what they really want to do is ignore everyone who doesn’t share their views. This isn’t democracy. It’s a mockery of it.

The supporters of each and every one of these efforts are people who can’t deal with two facts of life: (1) The Democrats have won the White House in the last two elections and (2) their view of America as a never-ending Andy Griffith Show is being challenged by an increasingly diverse and liberal population.

So they want to take their ball and go home. Rather than convince their fellow Americans of the validity of their beliefs, they want to quit the game.

Look at the other secession efforts and you hear the same song over and over:

To the north of us, a movement aspires to start something called the state of Jefferson which would span the contiguous and mostly rural area of Southern Oregon and Northern California.

This is nothing new. In October 1941, the mayor of Port Orford, Oregon announced that the Oregon counties of Curry, Josephine, Jackson and Klamath should join with the California counties of Del Norte, Siskiyou, and Modoc to form a new state, later named Jefferson.

On Nov. 27, 1941, a group of young men gained national media attention when, brandishing hunting rifles for dramatic effect, they stopped traffic on U.S. Route 99 south of Yreka, and handed out copies of a Proclamation of Independence, stating that the state of Jefferson was in “patriotic rebellion against the States of California and Oregon” and would continue to “secede every Thursday until further notice.” The effort ended when Pearl Harbor was bombed 10 days later.

Leaders of the new movement cite their frustration with the Democratic majority in the state legislature. Their complaints include gun control laws, environmental restrictions on the lumber and mining industries, as well as steep fees for fire prevention. Not to mention the political clout of Southern California which is a million miles away in distance and deed.

Or to put it more succinctly, “We have nothing in common with you people down south. Nothing,” Randy Bashaw, manager of the Jefferson State Forest Products lumber mill in the Trinity County hamlet of Hayfork, told a reporter. “The sooner we’re done with all you people, the better.”

The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors agreed, voting 4-1 recently to pursue seceding from California. But it will never fly politically. No Democrat in Sacramento or Washington, D.C. is going to support the formation of a state that would be largely Republican.

In Colorado, residents in the northern part of the state will vote next month on whether to secede after ballot language backed by Tea Party activists was approved.

Activists started pushing for the meetings after this year’s legislative session, when Democrats who control the Colorado legislature passed new laws regulating firearms and oil exploration. Throw in the legalization of same-sex legal unions and you have a secession movement.

“Our very way of life is under attack,” Weld County Commissioner Sean Conway said in an interview.

A proposal to form the state of Superior made up from portions of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and portions of northern Wisconsin has made news.

This oldie but goodie was first proposed in 1858 as the state of Ontonagon and received the support of no less than the New York Times which opined, “Unless Congress should interpose objections, which cannot reasonably be apprehended, we see no cause why the new State of Ontonagon should not speedily take her place as an independent member of the union.”

The current effort is said to be spurred by “cultural differences,” geographic separation, and the belief that the residents’ concerned are being ignored.

Then there is Texas, where they think big. So big in fact the talk down there is of becoming an independent nation. Some 100,000 of its residents signed an online petition this year seeking to secede from the United States.

Secession backers point to a section of the state constitution which claims Texans have the right “to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.” The White House countered with an 1869 Supreme Court ruling that found individual states did not have a right to secede. And politely said “no.”

This, of course, is folly. Would these people really want to sacrifice their American citizenship and all that it represents? Do they really want passports to travel to Oklahoma?

Fortunately, nobody takes Texas seriously but Texans.

All of this would be so much sound and fury signifying nothing if it wasn’t troubling.

These efforts reflect the polarization of our country, a never compromise mentality which dictates that you either crush your opponent or cut and run rather than work to effect change.

No good can come of this no matter which side of the political spectrum you occupy.

The irony, as Kimberly Karnes, a professor of political science and geography at Old Dominion University points out, is that a new state “would still be a part of the United States of America, meaning it answers to and must work within the U.S. system, as it currently operates.”

“For residents who want more personal freedoms and less government intrusion,” Karnes said, “they may find that even in a new state, Uncle Sam is still a frequent visitor in their community.”