I am writing this letter to discuss the possible secession of Vermont from the United States of America. This secession, at its root, would stem from a growing ideological difference between the apparent value system of the larger United States and the mythical value system of Vermont. I use words like “apparent” and “mythical,” because such talk is in line with my identity as a Vermonter.

As a Vermonter, I understand that there is no such thing as a Vermonter, that every individual is first and foremost, an individual. The individual does not belong to Vermont, but rather, Vermont belongs to the individuals. Vermont is not this grand thing under which individuals must serve; instead, Vermont is this grand thing that individuals must continually build. It is the effect of our actions. We cause Vermont.

But as members of one of the smallest states in the Union, we also understand that the power of the single individual is local. It is limited in its reach. Left alone, the individual does not accomplish much. Most success occurs due to the actions of a society of individuals.

Though the individual is empowered by society, it is not beholden to society’s power. While the individual is limited in power, the society is limited by the power of the solitary individual: society never speaks except by the voices of individuals; it never works except by the hands.

As individual Vermonters, we understand that every individual has inherent rights. These rights are the virtue of their individuality, for by them, the individual retains its natural power within a society of other individuals. The rights agreed to by all protect all. The only individual who must worry about society is the individual who is not willing to engage in self-defense. Luckily, in this great big state, self-defense need not manifest itself as violent conflict. It may occur as amicable separation. As Vermonters, we understand that there’s enough room for all of us.

This is our common understanding as Vermonters.

And this is the myth of Vermont.

Vermonters, people will tell you (and some of these people may live here), are just like everybody else. They are just as self-serving as the rest of humanity. If they had the opportunity, would seize power and utilize that power to make sure that Vermont got what it wants, regardless of how many individuals had to bend to its will.

These Vermonters, if they exist, are more than welcome to feel that way. They are welcome to mistrust the nature of man. As long as their mistrust stops at the end of my nose. Under the society envisioned by the mythical Vermonter, every individual has the right to think what they want, but the individual does not have the right to enforce its will upon other individuals who do not consent to it. Respect for the individual is the basis of the entire Vermont system.

It is this root that makes the mythical Vermonter different from the apparent American.

As with the Vermonter, so with the American. It is a myth, a grand myth. If every individual is local, if every individual can only engage society at the level of other individuals, how far removed is the American? The distance between the myth of the American and the reality of the individual is as long as one’s mailing address.

The apparent American manifests on the world stage. Right now, this is primarily the foreign policy of President George W. Bush. This is the foreign policy that we read about in the newspapers. The foreign policy of incarceration and torture, of economic subjugation through sanctions, and of a war of offense.

The American manifestation is not just political, but also cultural. McDonald’s outside the Pantheon. Television shows across Eurasia. Hollywood movies in South Africa. It is also consumerism. America as the individual country that will buy all of the world’s stuff, whether it’s T-shirts made in China or cocaine made in Columbia.

The apparent American is the global perspective of America.

How do the Vermonter and the American differ? Both claim to respect the individual, but the actions of America upon the global stage would seem to raise a flag as to the veracity of such a claim. Where the Vermonter understands that the rights of society stop at the individual’s nose, America tortures its prisoners and, in some cases, condemns them to death. Where the Vermonter understands that society exists because it makes the individual greater, America thinks the individual exists to make society more productive. Where the Vermonter understands that some people want to be left alone, America thinks it has the right to come in and create a market anywhere it pleases — of course, America will tell you that the market already exists, as if a market was some invisible thing, perhaps hidden under the ground, and all that was left to be done was tap it; but Vermonters understand that not everything is a resource to be tapped, a resource to be exploited, not the earth where we make our home, nor the people we call our friends. And in Vermont, everyone is a potential friend. There’s not much concern about foes up here.

The myth of Vermont’s foeless land, some people will tell you, is only possible because of the reality of America’s armed forces. The mythical Vermonter, however, says different. The fear of foes is what creates them. This is not the same thing as saying that there are not such things as individuals in the world who may want to cause harm simply for the sake of causing harm. But it is to say that such people are a rarity, and when they make themselves known, it only takes a few more individuals to quell the negative effect of such an individual. It is only the individual’s fear of other individuals that prevent it from acting in its own self-defense.

The concern Vermonters have is not of invisible, murderous individuals who lurk in the woods (Vermonters are not afraid of things in the woods), but rather, the concern that an individual will disrespect another individual, and from this disrespect will grow an enmity, and from this enmity will spring an attack. Vermonters think that if there’s an individual lurking in the woods, gunning for you, there’s a good chance that you deserve it. This is not say that such an attack is warranted, but it is to say that such an attack is not random. All of which is to suggest that a mythical Vermonter’s foreign policy wouldn’t arouse as much apparent enmity as has America’s, and without that enmity, attacks are not to be feared. Random attacks may occur, of course, — in the real world, random acts of violence are always a possibility — but fearing them makes as much practical sense as fearing that you’ll be taken hostage by your barber. Such fear debilitates the power of the individual, and puts the individual at the whim of society. Vermonters do not feel such fear.

But why the desire to secede? Such is the question that any Vermonter must ask. Why not just start small? Why not just try to get individuals who desire to make the mythical Vermont real to run for local office? If the individual lives locally, why not politic locally? Why must it be taken to the extreme level of secession?

Imagine for a moment, any reasonable Vermonter might say, that people who agree to the need for secession, who see the irreparable rift between Vermont’s respect for the individual and America’s treatment of the individual, that these people formed a political party. Let’s call it the Mythic Vermont party. The Mythic Vermont party wins at the local level. With power at the level of the towns, it may be able to drum up enough votes to get a few representatives at the state level. It may even become influential enough in some areas to elect a member to the U.S. House of Representatives. If there are enough of those areas, perhaps the U.S. might see a Mythic Vermont Senator. It’s a only a few difficult but climbable steps to the Mythic Vermont President, and then the Mythic Vermont party is now in control of the United States and, for the most part, its foreign policy. Hence, the mythic Vermonter is now the apparent American.

Such a thing, while improbable, is not impossible. So why give up America?, the reasonable Vermonter might ask. Walking away from it is like admitting the limited effect of the individual’s power to effect society.

But the limited effect of the individual’s power is one of the very basic parts of our common understanding as Vermonters. The individuals of Vermont can only have a negligible effect upon the individuals in Mississippi. And that is as it should be. This is not the same as arguing for isolationism, but it is the effect of respecting the individual. This respect involves not believing that an individual who has not personally engaged in a specific situation has the right to inflict its will upon the situation. But it also involves answering another individual’s call for help. Isolationism respects its own interests only. The common understanding leads Vermonters to respect the interest of other individuals.

Then why should Vermont give up on them? Again, why walk away from the individuals of America?

The move to secede from the United States of America is a way for the individuals of Vermont to announce their displeasure at the actions of the rest of the individuals who make America. It is not to announce displeasure at every other individual, but it is to announce it to those individuals who would call the America of today the same as the America that Vermont once agreed to join.

The difference between the Mythic Vermonter and the Apparent American show that some individuals have chosen to walk in a different direction. Those of us who have walked to the Mythic Vermont have no major conflict with that decision. But we also don’t understand why we must be made to follow them. It was a beautiful walk together for that long while, but now it seems we may part ways.

Amicably.

For those who would like to walk in our direction, despite where it may lead, this Mythic Vermonter says that you are welcome to walk along.

But only for as long as you like.
–
For more information, visit the websites of the Second Vermont Republlic and the Vermont Commons.