This book explores the treason trial of President Jefferson Davis, where the question of secession's constitutionality was debated.

Demonstrates the crucial role that the Constitution played in the coming of the Civil War.

Americans have never been more divided, and we’re ripe for a breakup. The bitter partisan animosities, the legislative gridlock, the growing acceptance of violence in the name of political virtue—it all invites us to think that we’d be happier were we two different countries. In all the ways that matter, save for the naked force of law, we are already two nations. There’s another reason why secession beckons, says F.H. Buckley: we’re too big. In population and area, the United States is one of the biggest countries in the world, and American Secession provides data showing that smaller countries are happier and less corrupt. They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily, and they’re freer too. There are advantages to bigness, certainly, but the costs exceed the benefits. On many counts, bigness is badness. Across the world, large countries are staring down secession movements. Many have already split apart. Do we imagine that we, almost alone in the world, are immune? We had a civil war to prevent a secession, and we’re tempted to see that terrible precedent as proof against another effort. This book explodes that comforting belief and shows just how easy it would be for a state to exit the Union if that’s what its voters wanted. But if that isn’t what we really want, Buckley proposes another option, a kind of Secession Lite, that could heal our divisions while allowing us to keep our identity as Americans.

Charles Dew’s Apostles of Disunion has established itself as a modern classic and an indispensable account of the Southern states’ secession from the Union. Addressing topics still hotly debated among historians and the public at large more than a century and a half after the Civil War, the book offers a compelling and clearly substantiated argument that slavery and race were at the heart of our great national crisis. The fifteen years since the original publication of Apostles of Disunion have seen an intensification of debates surrounding the Confederate flag and Civil War monuments. In a powerful new afterword to this anniversary edition, Dew situates the book in relation to these recent controversies and factors in the role of vast financial interests tied to the internal slave trade in pushing Virginia and other upper South states toward secession and war.

The political impulse to secede -- to attempt to separate from central government control -- is a conspicuous feature of the post-cold war world. It is alive and growing in Canada, Russia, China, Italy, Belgium, Britain, and even the United States Yet secession remains one of the least studied and least understood of all historical and political phenomena. The contributors to this volume have filled this gap with wide-ranging investigations -- rooted in history, political philosophy, ethics, and economic theory -- of secessionist movements in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Is secessionism extremist, a dangerous rebellion that threatens the democratic process? Gordon and his contributors think otherwise. They believe that the secessionist impulse is a vital part of the classical liberal tradition, one that emerges when national governments become too big and too ambitious. Unlike revolution, secession seeks only separation from rule, preferably through non-violent means. It is based on the moral idea, articulated by Ludwig von Mises in 1919, that "no people and no part of a people shall be held against its will in a political association that it does not want. The authors cite the famed 1861 attempt to create a confederacy of Southern states as legal, right, and a justifiable response to Northern political imperialism. They note that this was not the first American secession attempt -- the New England states tried to form their own confederacy during the War of 1812. This evidence, they argue, begs a reinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution along secessionist lines. Further they believe that the threat of secession should be revived as a bulwark against government encroachmenton individual liberty and private property rights, a guarantor of international free trade, and a protection against attempts to curb the freedom of association. These straightforward, pellucid arguments include essays by Donald Livingston, Murray N. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Thomas DiLorenzo, and Bruce Benson, among others. If overgrown nations continue to decompose, as they have for the last decade, these authors believe it is essential that secession be taken seriously, and fully understood. Secession, State, and Liberty makes a vital contribution toward that end. This stimulating, thought-provoking collection is necessary reading for intellectual historians and political scientists.

Book Review

At the heart of Georgia's secession from the Union in 1861 were two ideological cornerstones--the protection of white men's liberty and the defense of African slavery--Anthony Gene Carey argues in this comprehensive, analytical narrative of the three decades leading up to the Civil War. In Georgia, broad consensus on political essentials restricted the range of state party differences and the scope of party debate, but Whigs and Democrats battled intensely over how best to protect Southern rights and institutions within the Union. The power and security that national party alliances promised attracted Georgians, but the compromises and accommodations that maintaining such alliances required also repelled them. By 1861, Carey finds, white men who were out of time, fearful of further compromise, and compelled to choose acted to preserve liberty and slavery by taking Georgia out of the Union. Secession, the ultimate expression of white unity, flowed logically from the values, attitudes, and antagonisms developed during three decades of political strife.

Traditionally, the secession of the states in the lower South has been viewed as an irrational response to Lincoln's election or as a rational response to the genuine threat a Republican president posed to the geographical expansion of slavery. Both views emphasize the fundamental importance of relations between the federal government and the southern states, but overlook the degree to which secession was a response to a crisis within the South.Johnson argues that secession was a double revolution -- for home rule and for those who ruled at home -- brought about by an internal crisis in southern society. He portrays secession as the culmination of the long-developing tension between slavery on one side and the institutional and ideological consequences of the American Revolution on the other. This tension was masked during the antebellum years by the conflicting social, political, sectional, and national loyalties of many southerners. Lincoln's election forced southerners to choose among their loyalties, and their choice revealed a South that was divided along lines coinciding roughly with an interest in slavery and the established order.Starting with a thorough analysis of election data and integrating quantitative with more traditional literary sources, Johnson goes beyond the act of secession itself to examine what the secessionists said and did after they left the Union. Although this book is a close study of secession in Georgia, it has implications for the rest of the lower South. The result is a new thesis that presents secession as the response to a more complex set of motivations than has been recognized.

A timeless reference on the right of secession from Britainís Glorious Revolution to Canada's current situation. Born in Minnesota, John Remington Graham is a constitutional-law attorney who served as an advisor on secession to the amicus curiae for Quebec.

In Secession and Security, Ahsan I. Butt argues that states rather than separatists determine whether a secessionist struggle will be peaceful, violent, or genocidal. He investigates the strategies, ranging from negotiated concessions to large-scale repression, adopted by states in response to separatist movements. Variations in the external security environment, Butt argues, influenced the leaders of the Ottoman Empire to use peaceful concessions against Armenians in 1908 but escalated to genocide against the same community in 1915; caused Israel to reject a Palestinian state in the 1990s; and shaped peaceful splits in Czechoslovakia in 1993 and the Norway-Sweden union in 1905. Butt focuses on two main cases—Pakistani reactions to Bengali and Baloch demands for independence in the 1970s and India's responses to secessionist movements in Kashmir, Punjab, and Assam in the 1980s and 1990s. Butt's deep historical approach to his subject will appeal to policymakers and observers interested in the last five decades of geopolitics in South Asia, the contemporary Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and ethno-national conflict, separatism, and nationalism more generally.