SECESSION Your rhetorical framework for both parts 1 and 2, is critical, and acc

http://nomocracyinpolitics.com/2014/02/07/secession-and-messianic-statism-evaluating-the-current-union-of-the-states-part-1-by-allen-mendenhall/ON SECESSION

Your rhetorical framework for both parts 1 and 2, is critical, and accurate, but it does not take into account that decentralization would distribute all the wealth, status, and trade negotiating power currently in washington to the regions, and reduce the transaction cost of conducting economic policy.

The arguments for secession are (a) normative (b) institutional (c) economic (d) artistic and cultural, and (d) personal – given that status would be redistributed to individuals in the regions.

The arguments against secession are that the value of the dollar, the value of the military, and the value of insurance against catastrophe by all other regions. But it’s possible (and simple) to preserve those properties, and secede at the same time.

(BTW: When defining the state as a territorial monopoly, it’s Weber that Rothbard is quoting.)

Cheers