• More Californians than ever want to secede from US
    167 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51737296]What would actually happen is the military would enter the Californian Congress and the Governor's Office and maybe arrest the offenders and that's it. California wouldn't fight back, instead there's a good chance it'd be the California National Guard that does the arresting on behalf of the President of the United States. You might have a day where some bridges and streets are blocked by Army trucks and soldiers occupy Government buildings, but then you'd wake up the next day and they'll all be gone, and California will still be part of the union.[/QUOTE] so essentially the US government would commit a coup?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737322]so essentially the US government would commit a coup?[/QUOTE] Uh no they would restore order to the state, to hold it together.
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51737324]Uh no they would restore order to the state, to hold it together.[/QUOTE] if we are assuming that the populace of california has a referendum or something and votes on independence and forms a new government, wouldn't it still be the US government intervening with a coup?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737336]if we are assuming that the populace of california has a referendum or something and votes on independence and forms a new government, wouldn't it still be the US government intervening with a coup?[/QUOTE] No? [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] The Federal Government holds more power and has the final say above the State Government.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737336]if we are assuming that the populace of california has a referendum or something and votes on independence and forms a new government, wouldn't it still be the US government intervening with a coup?[/QUOTE] No because there is no legal framework for leaving the Union, and attempting to leave in such a way would be an illegal act. The US would then come in to restore the rule of law in California, and things will likely go on as normal afterward. Aside from Pro-Calexit being really really mad. [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] The reason military forces would be used is because the military has far more manpower than any other government branch. If protests or riots spring up, they have plenty of riot gear and personnel to cover the huge amounts of ground and keep things contained.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51737296]What would actually happen is the military would enter the Californian Congress and the Governor's Office and maybe arrest the offenders and that's it. California wouldn't fight back, instead there's a good chance it'd be the California National Guard that does the arresting on behalf of the President of the United States. You might have a day where some bridges and streets are blocked by Army trucks and soldiers occupy Government buildings, but then you'd wake up the next day and they'll all be gone, and California will still be part of the union.[/QUOTE] You're missing my point. I'm saying that the only way for California to become it's own country will be through peaceful separation. As in, Congress votes to allow them to secede based on an overwhelming desire or something. No one who wants California to leave is advocating an armed revolt or a declaration of secession like in 1861.
[QUOTE=Fayez;51737419]You're missing my point. I'm saying that the only way for California to become it's own country will be through peaceful separation. As in, Congress votes to allow them to secede based on an overwhelming desire or something. No one who wants California to leave is advocating an armed revolt or a declaration of secession like in 1861.[/QUOTE] Honestly, thats probably just as hypothetical as an armed revolt.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51737405]No because there is no legal framework for leaving the Union, and attempting to leave in such a way would be an illegal act. The US would then come in to restore the rule of law in California, and things will likely go on as normal afterward. Aside from Pro-Calexit being really really mad.[/quote] no i mean that given that if the people of california wanted independence (assume that this receives broad public and popular support there), and then created their own government and declared independence like the USA did in 1776, wouldn't subsequent intervention be essentially the US government doing a coup?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737441]no i mean that given that if the people of california wanted independence (assume that this receives broad public and popular support there), and then created their own government and declared independence like the USA did in 1776, wouldn't subsequent intervention be essentially the US government doing a coup?[/QUOTE] No it wouldnt because California is not a separate entity from the United States and is subject to its laws. It cannot legally leave the country.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737446]No it wouldnt because California is not a separate entity from the United States and is subject to its laws. It cannot legally leave the country.[/QUOTE] yes i know it's illegal i said that multiple times. but the point is that were it to declare independence then wouldn't the subsequent intervention of the army constitute a coup since it would be forced to dismantle the entire political structure and arrest all of the democratically elected leaders for following through on the wishes of their constituents? i mean the 13 colonies weren't a separate entity from britain, and they were subject to its laws, but that didnt stop it regardless
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737457]yes i know it's illegal i said that multiple times. but the point is that were it to declare independence then wouldn't the subsequent intervention of the army constitute a coup since it would be forced to dismantle the entire political structure and arrest all of the democratically elected leaders for following through on the wishes of their constituents?[/QUOTE] No. If we use the definition, "a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government", it is not a coup. [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737457] i mean the 13 colonies weren't a separate entity from britain, and they were subject to its laws, but that didnt stop it regardless[/QUOTE] Great Britain didnt have APC's and helicopters. I dont get how that relates to whether this would be a coup or not.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737354]No? [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] The Federal Government holds more power and has the final say above the State Government.[/QUOTE] In theory, yes. In practice, it's not that simple. Look at all of those states that have elected to legalize marijuana, in spite of it being a schedule one drug federally. The US government only holds as much authority as it's willing to enforce. Any attempt at secession would be dependent on the attitude of the presidential administration. We saw this with the civil war. Remember, Lincoln didn't take office until a few months into the war, and he went into it with the goal of preserving the union at all cost. His predecessor, James Buchanan, on the other hand, was of the opinion that while the south had no legal right to secede, the federal government had no right to prevent them. War and diplomacy aren't automatic processes, the individuals involved factor heavily into the course of events. If the Californians make a collective decision to secede, and the POTUS is either weak and ineffectual or simply sympathetic to their cause, then they will have independence.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737464]No. If we use the definition, "a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government", it is not a coup.[/quote] Well if the US government has to send an army to California I would say that it probably falls under that definition since they are suddenly, violently and illegally seizing power from the elected representatives of California (and in theory of the people) and putting a new government in charge that the denizens of that country do not wish for [quote]Great Britain didnt have APC's and helicopters. I dont get how that relates to whether this would be a coup or not.[/QUOTE] well the fact is that if they can declare independence i don't see why california or texas shouldn't be chastised so strongly for doing something that the other US states did in their history
As a Californian, I think secession is dumb as fuck. But I do believe we should be able launch our own damn satellites.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51737488]In theory, yes. Look at all of those states that have elected to legalize marijuana, though. The US government only holds as much authority as it's willing to enforce. Any attempt at secession would be dependent on the attitude of the presidential administration. We saw this with the civil war. Remember, Lincoln didn't take office until a few months into the war, and he went into it with the goal of preserving the union at all cost. His predecessor, James Buchanan, on the other hand, was of the opinion that while the south had no legal right to secede, the federal government had no right to prevent them. War and diplomacy aren't automatic processes, the individuals involved factor heavily into the course of events. If the Californians make a collective decision to secede, and the POTUS is either weak and ineffectual or simply sympathetic to their cause, then they will have independence.[/QUOTE] True enough, but i doubt the government would ever willingly allow secession in this day and age.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737441]no i mean that given that if the people of california wanted independence (assume that this receives broad public and popular support there), and then created their own government and declared independence like the USA did in 1776, wouldn't subsequent intervention be essentially the US government doing a coup?[/QUOTE] Setting up a second government to overthrow the sitting government and declare independence is certainly not legal... The US would come in and restore the sitting government.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737495]Well if the US government has to send an army to California I would say that it probably falls under that definition since they are suddenly, violently and illegally seizing power from the elected representatives of California (and in theory of the people) and putting a new government in charge that the denizens of that country do not wish for [/QUOTE] But if California tried to secede wouldnt that be illegal to begin with? Wouldnt that negate the US Government regaining control of it being a coup? Why are we even arguing this anyway. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737495]well the fact is that if they can declare independence i don't see why california or texas shouldn't be chastised so strongly for doing something that the other US states did in their history[/QUOTE] Different contexts, situations, and eras of history. I also dont see how it relates to whether it would be a coup or not.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737499]True enough, but i doubt the government would ever willingly allow secession in this day and age.[/QUOTE] Like I said, it depends on who's in charge. I honestly can't see DJT allowing it though. [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51737505]Setting up a second government to overthrow the sitting government and declare independence is certainly not legal... The US would come in and restore the sitting government.[/QUOTE] That's assuming the "illegal" government isn't comprised of the members of the original sitting government.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51737515]Like I said, it depends on who's in charge. I honestly can't see DJT allowing it though.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but even if he wasnt the President, i doubt the modern Federal Government in general would ever allow such a thing. At the very least, if the Prez decided to let it slide, there would be a massive shit storm.
[QUOTE=Aegis°;51737496]As a Californian, I think secession is dumb as fuck. But I do believe we should be able launch our own damn satellites.[/QUOTE] Can you not? I don't really know much about the laws regarding orbital launches and such, but if private entitites like SpaceX are able to then shouldn't your state be able to as well?
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51737505]Setting up a second government to overthrow the sitting government and declare independence is certainly not legal... The US would come in and restore the sitting government.[/QUOTE] the sitting government is the one voted in for gods sake. lets do this for a moment as a possible example. lets imagine that california collectively votes in all of their representatives (in local, state, and federal bodies) to be pro-independence politicians. the governor (who is a pro-independence guy elected by a majority of voters with the support of the independence parties) then decides to set the wheels in motion for independence and maybe say a referendum comes out. the californians then vote yes to independence and the existing politicians in california continue the same government as before (just independent). if the us army came in to overthrow that, would that not be overthrowing the sitting government? literally no other government there would exist because the voting public would only desire one that wanted independence [QUOTE=AaronM202;51737508]But if California tried to secede wouldnt that be illegal to begin with? Wouldnt that negate the US Government regaining control of it being a coup?[/quote] well i would consider overthrowing democratically elected politicians who are literally following through the demands of their electorate to be a crime greater than that of declaring independence. i mean if a part of russia went and declared independence in a similar fashion and then the kremlin sent in their army, or if the same thing happened in china the US politicians would be horrified and start denouncing russia (or china) for it
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737549]the sitting government is the one voted in for gods sake. lets do this for a moment as a possible example. lets imagine that california collectively votes in all of their representatives (in local, state, and federal bodies) to be pro-independence politicians. the governor (who is a pro-independence guy elected by a majority of voters with the support of the independence parties) then decides to set the wheels in motion for independence and maybe say a referendum comes out. the californians then vote yes to independence and the existing politicians in california continue the same government as before (just independent). if the us army came in to overthrow that, would that not be overthrowing the sitting government? literally no other government there would exist because the voting public would only desire one that wanted independence[/QUOTE] But they cant do that. It would not be legal for them to do that, and for the US Government to roll in and tell them "hey stop that" it would not be a coup because the act of seceding in and of itself would be illegal. [editline]27th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737549]well i would consider overthrowing democratically elected politicians who are literally following through the demands of their electorate to be a crime greater than that of declaring independence. i mean if a part of russia went and declared independence in a similar fashion and then the kremlin sent in their army, the US politicians would be horrified and start denouncing russia for it[/QUOTE] I dont know about that. Even then it depends on context, Russia is in a far different situation than us.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737464]Great Britain didnt have APC's and helicopters. I dont get how that relates to whether this would be a coup or not.[/QUOTE] They had one of the most highly trained armies in the world, backed up by an exceedingly powerful navy and a globe-spanning economy. We had podunk farmers armed with their grandpappies' fowling pieces. The revolution's success was a result of a series of mistakes and extraordinary incompetence on the part of British leadership, backing from the French and Spanish, and sheer dumb luck at exactly the right moments.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51737533]Can you not? I don't really know much about the laws regarding orbital launches and such, but if private entitites like SpaceX are able to then shouldn't your state be able to as well?[/QUOTE] I don't think a satellite has ever been launched by a individual state. So it could happen but the supreme court might say they can't afterwards
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51737572]They had one of the most highly trained armies in the world, backed up by an exceedingly powerful navy and a globe-spanning economy. We had podunk farmers armed with their grandpappies fowling pieces. The revolution's success was a result of a series of mistakes and extraordinary incompetence on the part of British leadership, backing from the French and Spanish, and sheer dumb luck at exactly the right moments.[/QUOTE] Im aware, just pointing out theres a far greater divide in military power now than back then :v:. It could, maybe, be possible, but it'd be a hell of a lot more difficult than the Revolution was.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737565]But they cant do that. It would not be legal for them to do that, and for the US Government to roll in and tell them "hey stop that" it would not be a coup because the act of seceding in and of itself would be illegal.[/QUOTE] even if it were done democratically with widespread popular support? like what can the US government itself do to justify invading a country that declared independence, overthrowing the entire political class, disenfranchising the voters, putting it under occupation, etc? at this point the legality of it is just splitting hairs. its still essentially a coup (or invasion if the californians decided to defend themselves)
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737594]even if it were done democratically with widespread popular support? [/QUOTE] Yeah? [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737594]like what can the US government itself do to justify invading a country that declared independence, overthrowing the entire political class, disenfranchising the voters, putting it under occupation, etc?[/QUOTE] Because it would be illegal? They didnt seek permission from the Federal Government to negotiate it? Theres probably a whole host of reasons they could come up with both legitimate and not. The Civil War was a hell of a lot more destructive and bloody than it needed to be, but aside from certain populations in the South, people seem to be essentially fine with the outcome. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737594]at this point the legality of it is just splitting hairs. its still essentially a coup (or invasion if the californians decided to defend themselves)[/QUOTE] Why are you even arguing it to begin with?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;51737578]Im aware, just pointing out theres a far greater divide in military power now than back then :v:. It could, maybe, be possible, but it'd be a hell of a lot more difficult than the Revolution was.[/QUOTE] We have the most lethal collection of fighting forces in the history of mankind. We have guided bombs, drones equipped with missiles, more armored vehicles than we need, and tough, highly realistic training. The Taliban and al-Qaeda? They have almost nothing but small-arms, mortars, home-made rockets and IEDs. Their training is, in many cases, laughable. They've spent the last decade and a half making us look stupid. Warfare is no simpler than politics.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51737646]We have the most lethal collection of fighting forces in the history of mankind. We have guided bombs, drones equipped with missiles, more armored vehicles than we need, and tough, highly realistic training. The Taliban and al-Qaeda? They have almost nothing but small-arms, mortars, home-made rockets and IEDs. Their training is, in many cases, laughable. They've spent the last decade and a half making us look stupid. Warfare is no simpler than politics.[/QUOTE] Ah true enough i suppose. In my minds eye its a lot simpler an outcome than it probably would be, but i still dont see something like that being possible, if only because i think it'd be far less likely for anyone to actually fight back on the Californian side compared to the Taliban or Al-Qaeda :v:
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737549]the sitting government is the one voted in for gods sake. lets do this for a moment as a possible example. lets imagine that california collectively votes in all of their representatives (in local, state, and federal bodies) to be pro-independence politicians. the governor (who is a pro-independence guy elected by a majority of voters with the support of the independence parties) then decides to set the wheels in motion for independence and maybe say a referendum comes out. the californians then vote yes to independence and the existing politicians in california continue the same government as before (just independent). if the us army came in to overthrow that, would that not be overthrowing the sitting government? literally no other government there would exist because the voting public would only desire one that wanted independence[/QUOTE] Who said they would overthrow it? They would prevent California from leaving the union and possibly arrest some politicians and the governor for Conspiracy or Treason, though the charges might end up dropped, and if not the sentences would be light. The legislator would go on although some empty seats would need refilled, and the scene would be a reminder that attempting to leave the union is prohibited.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.