The concept of Texas independence, often termed “Texit,” is gaining traction, moving beyond mere state pride to a serious political proposition. Daniel Miller, president of the Texas Nationalist Movement, is a key figure in this movement, arguing that secession isn’t just a fringe idea but a viable path for Texas. His book, “Texit,” meticulously lays out the reasons and a strategic plan for Texas to become an independent nation, resonating with a sentiment of self-determination that extends beyond state borders.
Miller’s argument isn’t rooted in simple Texan exceptionalism, but in a critical analysis of the current relationship between Texas and the federal government. He contends that the U.S. Federal Government has become overly powerful, fiscally irresponsible, and detached from the principles it was founded upon. This viewpoint aligns with broader conservative critiques of federal overreach, making it appealing to many beyond just Texans. The core of Miller’s argument posits that state governments, as subdivisions of the federal system, could be more responsive and efficient if they were free from the perceived burdens of Washington bureaucracy. This resonates with a universal desire for independence, freedom, self-determination, and self-government.
Alt text: The iconic Texas state flag, known as the “Lone Star Flag,” waving proudly, symbolizing the spirit of Texas independence and the Texit movement.
Perhaps the most compelling aspect of Miller’s “Texit” is its pragmatic approach to achieving independence. He doesn’t advocate for a sudden, radical break from the United States. Instead, he proposes a phased strategy, beginning with a statewide referendum to gauge public support for secession. This democratic step is crucial to establish the will of the Texan people. Following a successful referendum, Miller envisions a period of managed transition, carefully disentangling Texas from federal dependencies and establishing it as a sovereign nation.
Miller argues that Texas possesses the resources and economic strength to be self-sufficient. The transition would involve complex negotiations with the U.S. government regarding treaties, federal assets within Texas – such as military bases – and the division of national debt and assets. This measured, step-by-step plan aims to minimize disruption and ensure a stable transition to independence.
Alt text: A detailed map of Texas showcasing its abundant natural resources, including oil, gas, agriculture, and renewable energy potential, underscoring Texas’s economic self-sufficiency in the context of Texit.
While “Texit” presents a detailed and researched case for Texas independence, it also rests on certain assumptions. One key question revolves around the political organization of Texans who favor independence and how to effectively mobilize this sentiment. Furthermore, the book acknowledges but perhaps underplays the perspectives of Texans who were not born in the state and who strongly identify as American patriots. These voices represent a significant part of the Texas population and their views are crucial to the Texit debate.
“Texit” builds upon Miller’s earlier work, “Line in the Sand,” further exploring the historical roots of Texas nationalism and the practical implications of a distinct Texan national identity. Regardless of one’s stance on Texas secession, Miller’s work warrants serious consideration. He presents a well-structured and thought-provoking argument that taps into fundamental desires for self-governance and raises important questions about the balance of power between states and the federal government in the 21st century. His proposals and the growing Texit movement reflect a significant political undercurrent in Texas and the broader debate about states’ rights and national identity in the United States.
Alt text: A portrait of Daniel Miller, the author of “Texit” and president of the Texas Nationalist Movement, a key figure advocating for Texas independence and self-determination.
