I have often considered this tension between defense and secession. Do you run away, or do you stay and fight?
I moved with my family to Uruguay, so in general I would say I lean toward secession. I decided after a few traumatic experiences fighting against the more evil forces of empire and corporatism that I couldn’t live my life in stay and fight mode. I don’t thrive fighting. If I am spending my time swimming against the current and constantly putting out fires to protect myself and my family, then I am not able to fully live my life and to pursue things that are positive and joyful.
Many people have critiqued me for this. They say I am running away. Often they say I am escaping into a fantasy. The real world is staying and fighting. I don’t disagree. If I were to choose to stay, that would mean fully committing to defending the best ideals of the United States, ones I think are worth fighting for. I admire the fighters.
Another potential way to approach defense versus secession is in layers. Maybe you can stay in place, but secede in spheres of life. You can try to approach medicine holistically, focusing on prevention over (pharmaceutical) cure. You could begin to homeschool, or form homeschool cooperatives, or join a forest school or start to build your own school with a few families. You could move to a place off the map, where you will mostly be left alone to choose the specific version of your dream you want to pursue. State borders, even municipal border, matter in determining your freedom.
One of my favorite authors, Morris Berman, talks about the “monastic option.” In the midst of chaos, build a monastery. Find ways to make it as impermeable as possible. As the chaos proceeds, the monastic life should be able to be stable, to provide for a good and decent life.
There are two problems with the monastic option:
It’s lonely.
We’ve lost the ability to totally subsist in isolation, let alone form communities that could manage subsistence together
Interestingly enough, Morris Berman attempted the monastic option for decades in the U.S., only to move to Mexico for his retirement years. He enjoys days of writing and wandering around the little shops in his village chatting with his neighbors. It’s a peaceful existence.
I am choosing a kind of roundabout path to this. I am fully committed to life in Uruguay. To raising my kids in a sane place, with healthy people and a decent culture of resilience. But I won’t ever look away from my duty to the United States: my friends, family and culture. So I learn what I can from secession and I pass it back to those who are stuck in defense mode. They need all the help they can get, and I want them to succeed.
In many ways I feel those who choose defense are braver than I am, more committed to a place and a cause and an ideal.
I imagine where you fall on this spectrum is determined by the degrees of freedom you have. What resources do you have? What kind of family? What are your goals for your life?
I don’t judge anyone for their answer to the question of how to manage a crumbling society. We all must find ways to thrive somehow, and to support each other’s successes.
Thanks for the thoughtful piece l, Ashley.
One other angle to consider: of the stressors one is responding to are themselves growing, secede may be temporary, and when the only option becomes "fight" l, the stressors may just be that much bigger and stronger.
It's also possible the crest will be reached and waters will recede. Impossible to say of course.
You cannot secede from planet earth
What ever life path you are on you represent an alternative that either promotes the well being of earth or not
Staying is a popular (probably doomed) path, more alternative are needed to be explored and vetted out
Successful alternatives that promote earth health are models for others to follow
Staying is inertia, it is massive, it will take much energy to stop. Reducing the mass is a smart option.