Mormons Seceding from US while Nobody’s Watching


SALT LAKE CITY – With much of the attention of the US and indeed the world focused on the upcoming presidential election in which Hillary Clinton will face off with Donald Trump in a debate many are already describing as “drinking game worthy”, the humble Mormon people are quietly seceding from the United States again.

The US flag has been taken down in all of Utah and much of neighbouring states and replaced with a “Deseret” flag, escaping the notice of everyone on the US coasts where all the news is produced in special news factories.

The Mormon population originally settled in the region to escape persecution by US imperialism, only to strike a deal with Washington later, resulting in the integration of the fledgling Mormon bourgeoisie into the political apparatus of the Yankee bourgeoisie. The alliance is out of step with bourgeois descriptions of the roots of the Utah War, which was supposedly motivated by religious fanaticism on the part of the Mormons and/or a desire to wipe out polygamy on the part of the state. In actuality, the war was about ethics in video game journalism.

Worker’s Spatula correspondents joined a delegation made up principally of local members of the FRSO (the one that calls the other “revisionist”) who travelled to Salt Lake City to discuss strategy and tactics with the Mormon leadership. The aim of the meeting was to get the new Mormon leadership to back various secessionist efforts supported by the FRSO and other Marxist-Leninist organisations who understand national liberation as an important site of struggle within the imperialist United States.

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has long upheld the line of national liberation for the Lamanite people,” President of the State of Deseret Thomas Monson explained to the Marxist-Leninist delegation. “In line with this we are happy to discuss whatever we can do to help the Diné people on our southern border, provided that we be allowed free right to propagate our faith in their territory in the meanwhile.”

“As for the Hamite nation, we’re not against them. We have many Hamite friends.”

The meeting also allowed for a discussion of theoretical and historical matters. Eager to find common ground, the Mormon leadership assured the Marxist-Leninists in attendance that they remained “very grateful to your people, without whom we would all be speaking German”, although they also noted that “a lot of you seem to speak German as well, as do many of us, for reasons of proselytism.”

More dialectically conscious Marxist-Leninists in attendance were disappointed to learn that Mormon doctrine removed the dialectical conception of the Godhead in favour of some bullshit that doesn’t even involve mutual penetration of opposites. The women’s section of Worker’s Spatula was disappointed to find that the Mormon leadership is still not open to the idea of prayer to the Heavenly Mother. The women’s section of the FRSO was disappointed to find out it still does not exist.

US ICOR affiliate Revolutionary Organization of Labor surprised all of those who read their newsletter (mostly Germans, very few actual US citizens) by issuing what can at best be described as a lukewarm response to Mormon secession:

“The Mormon people do not constitute an oppressed nation, but an oppressor nation within the imperialist United States. Therefore, there is no guarantee that their secession will have a progressive effect on the US or the international situation at large. The very fact that nobody has even noticed that they seceded is evidence that they do not play a progressive role. Maybe if they weren’t out in the middle of fucking nowhere, they could do some good.

“For example, we’re here in Boston, which is a large and important city. Granted, nobody in Boston knows it, but at least we are technically here.”


10 thoughts on “Mormons Seceding from US while Nobody’s Watching

      1. John McDonnell's Kalishnikov

        They would probably have created something similar. I think they would have seen themselves as the true Americans, and have tried to reunite with the U.S. as a Mormon divinely inspired democracy. They didn’t really want to be independent, just not persecuted.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Mormon sovereignty would have never lasted, unfortunately. The bourgeois-slaveholder federal government was hell-bent on establishing territorial continuity from the Atlantic to Pacific oceans and was willing to resort to ethnic cleaning and genocide to make it happen. Also, independent republics like Texas ended up joining the U.S. voluntarily so I suspect an utterly landlocked Mormon state would have eventually moved in this direction as well.


  1. Glen

    I know that this piece is humourous, but I’d like to pose a question given your support for the ROL and its stance vis-a-vis Appalachia. Utah is stolen land, and the Mormons are a settler population. The same is true of Appalachia and Appalachians. How can we support the “national liberation” of parasitic settler populations?


    1. Given that you’re posing a serious question on here about an issue which is of some importance, we should make some things clear:

      1) As Worker’s Spatula, it’s not correct to say that we seriously collectively support the ROL per se. There are sympathetic elements within the Spatula, and we think they are one of the few Marxist groups in the US with a decent line (indeed, along with FRSO and some RIM-ish Maoists, they are the only ones who seem to understand the national question in any way like the one we do), but we need to be clear that we generally take all US communists with a grain of salt.
      2) We do however support the idea of recognising that Appalachia is a nation, since it does seem to fit the criteria, just as Québec and probably yes, the Mormons of Utah are a nation, but, to your point:
      3) The Yankee nation is not recognised AS SUCH but is the nonetheless the dominant oppressor nation within the most aggressive imperialist power on Earth. The Québecois as a national formation are even recognised under that name, but as is known, they also have the power to oppress indigenous nations. The same is CERTAINLY true of the Mormons, even more so, just as it could be true of some Appalachian nation, whose internal class dynamics and external relations with non-settler nationalities do appear to mirror more the dominant Yankee nation than those of the Afro-American nation.
      4) We support the exploiting of contradictions between any national bourgeoisies and err on the side of the poor and oppressed in how that is done. For example, given the Mormons of Utah, if they found themselves in conflict with the central government, we would not necessarily support the state against them, but we would also not necessarily rally around them as we rally around moments of self-determination by the Afro-American nation. If it was possible to side with the Mormon “national bourgeoisie” (or even, if you can imagine it, a class-conscious Mormon-specific proletarian movement) against Yankee imperialism AND support the liberation of oppressed non-settler nationalities, then we would. But this would rely on some sort of tacit alliance between indigenous liberation movements and the Mormons. The Québec case is of course instructive: The Québécois have a right to self-determination no matter what, but so too do the indigenous peoples of Canada, who are crushed by the Québécois and the English Canadians alike. Until a Québécois political movement becomes dominant that understands this, Québécois secession may indeed be worthy of our mockery (though not for the patronising and chauvinist reasons much of English Canada mocks this movement, just as the Yankee mockery of Appalachians and Mormons is not necessarily progressive).
      5) Whether or not the ROL’s line in Appalachia reflects this is difficult to say, you would have to pose that question to them. But regardless,
      6) The question of Appalachia requires investigation into the concrete conditions, as they are certainly treated differently than Mormon Country or Québec, and it may be more possible to turn Appalachians into internationalists who want to fight the US alongside Afro-Americans and indigenous peoples.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s