On a frigid Thursday afternoon, around 100 New Hampshire residents gathered on the steps of the Legislative Office Building to support secession from the union. The group was comprised of conservatives, libertarians, and anarchists. The sponsors of the legislation are registered Republicans, but most of them likely identify more as ‘libertarians’. The rally was reported on by NHPR, Free Keene, Chau Kelley, and other local media. Unlike most pro-liberty rallies, however, there were no American flags to be found; all of the flags were navy blue with the seal of New Hampshire in the middle. 

At around 2:40 PM, the crowd began to sing while shivering in the sub-20 degree weather. They were singing a modified version of a song about New Hampshire called ‘Live Free or Die’. It was a short, simple song with an easy tune, and the crowd caught on in seconds. The activists believe that the song may function as an interim national anthem once New Hampshire leaves the union. “Independent and free, the home of liberty!”, the crowd sang loudly enough to be heard a block away. 

In addition to handing out the song sheets, some secession activists gave out fliers with information about New Hampshire independence and small New Hampshire flags. A table featured an assortment of Alu’s books, all of which discuss the need for independence from DC politicians. At 3:00, the group filed into the lobby of the LOB for a press conference. Speaking at the podium with multiple media microphones attached to it, Rep. Mike Sylvia introduced his bill and made a quick statement before he introduced Daniel Richard (a New Hampshire constitutional expert) and Elliot “Alu” Axelman (author, podcaster, & FNHI president). The co-sponsors of the legislation (CACR32) were also present at the press conference.

For the first time in at least 150 years in the united states, citizens had the opportunity to speak to legislators at a public hearing in support of leaving the union. At 3:30, the pro-independence activists climbed the stairs to the 2nd floor for the legislation’s first public hearing in the House committee on state-federal relations. For the next three hours, the committee listened to the many citizens who testified on the legislation. The hearing began with Rep. Sylvia presenting his legislation to the committee. Then, the chairman allowed Brodie Deshaies, a Republican member of the committee to testify in opposition to the bill. For the next 27 minutes, the moderate pro-DC Republican proceeded to read the letter that he had previously sent to the committee and expand on it with more reasons that the committee should oppose the legislation. He argued that because the Constitution does not mention secession, it should be considered illegal by default. He also implied that supporting secession may be treason or rebellion. Other than three legislators and one citizen, every person who spoke supported the legislation, which would simply place the question of independence on the ballot if passed by the House & Senate. 

Many of the pro-independence speakers referred to Deshaies’ remarks as “gaslighting”, “false”, and “anti-liberty”. A few also mentioned that he was wrong when he claimed that leaving the united states prevents individuals from receiving social security checks. The speakers in favor of secession from the tyrants in DC included former legislators, veterans, and immigrants from communist nations. Among the many reasons the speakers gave for their support of placing secession on the ballot in November were the federal government’s abuses of due process and fair justice, the perpetual wars all over the world, drug prohibition, taxes, economic regulations, the police & surveillance state, and the diverging values held by those in various states in the union. After Desahies and a few other Representatives mentioned that the Constitution must be enforced to a tee, Alu and others said that if the Constitution were enforced, nearly every legislator in DC would be convicted of treason for eviscerating the Constitution’s 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 10th amendments. The committee members opposed to independence had no rebuttal for that comment. The committee plans to vote on whether to recommend CACR32 on Friday, January 21st. It may be voted on in the House any time between Monday and April. Regardless of what the committee says, the entire House will have a roll call vote on the legislation, which would force every Representative to be on record for their vote. 


No victim, no trial, but punished?

Two of the individuals who attended the rally were long-time New Hampshire liberty activists Ian Freeman and Rich Paul. Ian is an activist for peace, freedom, and independence, and the co-founder of Free Talk Live, a pro-freedom radio show that is syndicated on 185 stations around the union. Rich is a long-time freedom activist who has worked on drug legalization in New Hampshire for years. The two Keene-based men have been close friends for at least a few years. They drove to the rally in separate cars and did not communicate at all during the entire day’s events, though. 

Why not?

Freeman and Paul were among the six individuals arrested by federal agents in March of 2021 and charged with multiple victimless crypto-related crimes. They were held in jail for a few months and then released on bail to await the trial, which is scheduled for November of 2022 and could result in decades in federal prison. The federal government has placed some strict pre-trial conditions on them in order to punish them, though. Among the punishments are the prohibition from having any communication with anyone who may be called as a witness at their trial (pretty much all of their friends), prohibition from using crypto-currency, firearms, or the Signal app, and others. Rich Paul is also forbidden from speaking publicly. And Ian Freeman must wear an ankle bracelet and ask for permission to go places from his parole officer. These horrific violations of due process perpetrated by the federal government are a few of the seemingly infinite reasons why so many Granite Staters so desperately want to separate from DC politicians.

I’m British first

One of the legislators who spoke in opposition to CACR32 told the committee that he identifies first as an American and then as a Granite Stater. He indicated that New Hampshire and its citizens have no unique identity; we are all one America and we are all the same. Many of the anti-independence legislators implied that separating from a larger government or union is never legitimate, no matter what. Later in the afternoon, one particularly humorous speaker drew motivation from the anti-freedom Representative: “I consider myself first a citizen of the UK…and then an American”, the tall man with long blonde hair and glasses told the committee in an exaggerated British accent. “I do not support this legislation, and I support an amendment to it to return the power to the crown of England, to its rightful ruler…” As the crowd began to laugh as they understood the brilliant point that this man was making, the chairman of the committee asked him to wrap up his testimony. He finished by saying that we must all swear fealty to the Queen and kiss her ring, begging to be allowed to return under her kingdom. “Long live the queen!” he shouted as he stood up and left the speaker’s table to wild applause.

Considering that the secession from Britain was as illegal and traitorous as any act could be, if we are to believe that secession should be considered illegitimate, then the Declaration of Independence was illegitimate, meaning that the government of Britain technically should still be our rightful ruler. The opponents of independence had no rebuttal to this point. 

Do you say the pledge?

The first question of the hearing was asked by Rep. Moffet, addressing Rep. Sylvia. “Representative, do you not say the pledge of allegiance?!?!” Moffet seemed to believe that only violent criminals and psychopaths would dishonor America by refusing to say the pledge. Of course, he was insinuating that the part of the pledge that claims that the union is ‘indivisible’ is at odds with secession. Sylvia calmly explained that he actually does not say the pledge of allegiance. He didn’t mention that the pledge of allegiance is not a binding document – like the Constitution which the DC politicians violate ad infinitum – but it’s actually a short prayer to our overlords in DC written a few decades ago by an avowed socialist (ironically, to help him sell American flags and his magazines). I don’t say the pledge either. It’s creepy and the antithesis of freedom and individualism. I don’t worship DC tyrants. 

Public support

A few of the legislators on the committee mentioned that the public either doesn’t support CACR32 or doesn’t care much about it. Some of them claimed that they have not received many emails about the legislation, and one said that if a lot of people cared, there would have been over 100 people at the hearing (never mind that people generally work during weekdays). While it is true that this was not the most well-attended public hearing in the NH legislature’s history, saying that this issue is not supported or not important may not be entirely accurate. 

There have been no scientific polls of New Hampshire residents’ sentiments about secession. The few polls that were conducted on the issue by major media publications found that 80% supported placing the question of independence on the ballot for the people to vote on. If people didn’t care about secession, there wouldn’t be over a dozen state representatives publicly supporting CACR32. If people didn’t care much about this hearing, the official video of the hearing wouldn’t have more than double the number of views on YouTube as the next most popular one, and around 10 times the views of the average committee hearing. 

Perhaps most importantly, though, there is momentum on the side of independence. Now that a few thousand people in New Hampshire have tasted liberty and independence, there is no stopping them. The movement for independence from DC will only continue to grow until it achieves its goal – total separation from DC and the ability to govern themselves. 

Public debate

I have been offering very publicly the opportunity to debate me about secession. Not a single state representative has taken me up on the offer. Many have strongly stated that they do not wish to debate against secession. One non-politician did debate me, but by the end of the debate essentially said that he supports secession, but is pessimistic of its chances of success. If secession is such a terrible idea, why won’t any of the 350 anti-independence legislators agree to a public debate on the matter for all to hear? 


We now know that the DC politicians and bureaucrats used our tax dollars to fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, where the coronavirus was released. The federal government created this virus,  then shut down the world and crashed the economy and forced masks and vaccines on us. And they coerced state governments into enforcing corona-fascism on their people. Secession pretty much ends corona-fascism. If New Hampshire were independent, we likely would have suffered from little to no corona-fascism at all.

Peace vs violence

Throughout the hearing, the pro-independence speakers repeatedly told the committee that their desire was for a peaceful separation from the violent tyrants in DC. They stressed that they opposed violence and did not want any sort of war. The committee members opposed to independence and freedom, led by Deshaies repeatedly stated that supporting secession is treason and that the federal government could and should send in the military to kill those who desired to leave the union peacefully. The contrast was very clear to everyone watching the hearing. One side wants to peacefully leave an abusive relationship. The abuser threatens to use violence to keep the abused from leaving.

Recognition of Secession

Self-appointed emperor of the anti-independence coalition, Brodie Deshaies (R-Wolfeboro) said during the hearing that secession was so impossible and illegitimate that even Lincoln never recognized secession. He claimed that Lincoln and the union government simply considered the southern states to have a small issue with some idiotic rebels, and insisted that they still had functioning governments that considered themselves part of the union. This is a false assertion for multiple reasons:

  1. Secession was supported by the massive majority of southerners. It was not a fringe movement.
  2. Lincoln recognized the confederacy as a separate nation when he deported a congressmen to the confederacy for speaking against the war.
  3. Lincoln acknoledged that the confederacy was a separate nation when he blockaded their ports, which happens to be an act of war.
  4. The confederacy’s government was fully functioning for four years and even printed its own currency from 1861-1864.

Are the words ‘deportation’ and ‘blockade’ used to describe governments doing things to their own country or to other countries? Exactly.

Update 1/21: Taking into account the threat of charging them with treason for supporting independence, the committee voted 21-0 to recommend killing the bill. The entire House will soon have a roll call vote on CACR32.

Update: The full House killed the bill, with only 13 brave legislators voting against the motion.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Liberty Block or any of its members. We welcome all forms of serious feedback and debate.

1 Comment

Deanne · February 8, 2022 at 1:16 pm

I have been communicating with my state representative about N. H. secession. The last message stated that CACR32 is unlikely to be passed in the house and would be “dead on arrival” in the Senate, and then claimed a higher interested in what is happening in Canada right now.

The following was my reply:

I am watching Canada too, but have (unfortunately) been noticing far too many people lauding and appealing to “democracy.” “Democracy” is their watchword. I realize they are Canadians, but it is rampant in the U. S as well. It appears these people don’t know what democracy really means and why the U. S. founding fathers were not in favor of it. I fear that with the serious lack of understanding of basic issues like this, as well as the destruction of the moral basis of the Constitution, any reversal for Canada (which may eventually spread to the U. S.) will only be temporary. The power elites may back off for a time, but they will regroup and press on again at the next opportunity.

Whatever happens to the north, it is at this point, a wait and see situation.

Meanwhile, N. H. could take some deliberate and purposeful action. In regards to N. H. secession, I found this article [http://libertyblock.com/rebuttal-to-anti-independence-letter-by-state-rep/ ] very interesting. It is sad to me that this Deshaies fellow can’t see how he is twisting founding documents to try to argue for the opposite of what is clearly stated. In other cases, he avoids the parts that disprove his claims. I don’t know if he is just confused or if he is straight-out intentionally being deceptive.

Comments are closed.