More Californians than ever want to secede from US
167 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51740013]well its my opinion that if a country is really great to live in, then there won't be any independence movements. if the only thing holding the united states together is the fact that its illegal to leave, then it implies that your country doesn't really have a collective identity at all.[/QUOTE]
How do you feel about sovereign citizens? If you really follow this logic that participation in the country is purely optional, then a state, city, or even person deciding they don't want to be part of the system should all be equally valid.
Which of course is not how the overwhelming majority of people think. If a random town in England decides they're not going to pay taxes or otherwise contribute to the national government, the government is not going to sit back and decide that they're allowed to leave the country if they really want to.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51740013]plus doesn't it go against the original principles of the United States to prevent people from declaring independence with military force?[/QUOTE]
Considering the founding fathers were very gung-ho about using military force to secure independence, not really.
[QUOTE=cdr248;51735624]lmao nice sample size[/QUOTE]
This happens in every fucking thread where there's a poll. A [i]randomly[/i] selected sample of 500 is enough to give a confidence interval of 4% at the 95% confidence level for a population the size of California's. In other words, if this survey was carried out properly (and I trust Reuters and Ipsos to do that), then we can be 95% sure that 28-36% of Californians want to secede.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51738620]Not in California lol, is there a gun there that isn't illegal for private citizens to own?[/QUOTE]
We're legally allowed to have 5.56 semiautomatic unregistered rifles.
[QUOTE=Radical_ed;51743273]We're legally allowed to have 5.56 semiautomatic unregistered rifles.[/QUOTE]
With 10 round fixed magazines, no thumbhole or pistol grip, no foregrip, bayonet lug, no barrel threading. And no shoulder thingies that goes up.
[QUOTE=catbarf;51741291]How do you feel about sovereign citizens? If you really follow this logic that participation in the country is purely optional, then a state, city, or even person deciding they don't want to be part of the system should all be equally valid.[/quote]
Which of course is not how the overwhelming majority of people think. If a random town in England decides they're not going to pay taxes or otherwise contribute to the national government, the government is not going to sit back and decide that they're allowed to leave the country if they really want to.[/quote]
there's a very clear and qualitative difference between nations/countries and towns/citizens though
things such as national identity, a shared culture and language, often a common religion, a common literary culture and media unique to that nation, etc help to shape a shared identity between everyone living there.
loads of nations exist without having states (or were once stateless in the past), and continue to do so.
if america truly was united, then it would not really have strong independence movements and a need to militarily quash them. if it was really united, then the loss of a province or two would not affect the overall integrity of the nation as a whole.
so if the only thing standing in the way of independence for say texas, california, or hawaii is the fact that the US government will immediately invade, then what is there actually holding the american nation together?
[quote]Considering the founding fathers were very gung-ho about using military force to secure independence, not really.[/QUOTE]
no i mean they were fighting against a colonial overlord (britain). the british then sent an army to quash the rebellion. what difference is there between that and washington DC sending an army to say hawaii to put down the rebellion?
California leaving would be bad. California forcefully seceding without the OK of the rest of the nation would be very bad.
[editline]29th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51737670]
so what do you do when the californians vote in pro-independence politicians the next year who follow through on their demands? do you occupy the country again or what?[/QUOTE]
Seceding is considered an act of treason. It doesn't matter how pro independence their politicians will be, because if the government doesn't OK the secession then it's a no-go. If there was some crazy revolution/resistance the area would likely be occupied by the national guard or something
[QUOTE=Kylel999;51745400]California leaving would be bad. California forcefully seceding without the OK of the rest of the nation would be very bad.
[editline]29th January 2017[/editline]
Seceding is considered an act of treason. It doesn't matter how pro independence their politicians will be, because if the government doesn't OK the secession then it's a no-go. If there was some crazy revolution/resistance the area would likely be occupied by the national guard or something[/QUOTE]
As a Brit, I can't help but feel that there is a great deal of irony involved in this.
If people think the UK would hurt badly after leaving the EU, then California leaving the US would be considerably worse.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51738487]It's illegal to leave the union. Simple as that. We let people leave, and it shows we have no integrity. Then everyone is going to want out for stupid reasons and the United States will be fragmented in a decade. It'd be like the fall of the Soviet Union all over again, including the decades long economic hardships and the flood of top-of-the-line military hardware into the hands of newly empowered criminal elements.
Besides if California really becomes as radical as you imply, we'll likely be seeing insurgent movements and terrorist attacks on the United States, at which point the military would be deployed. But that's completely unrealistic, California no matter how bad they want to succeed, is probably not going to become a rogue state like the one in your examples. We're a stable country, and they're one of the wealthiest states.[/QUOTE]
If the California situation is unrealistic then how do you reckon the US would split up in a decade if it were legal? Entire states aren't going to start wanting to leave just because they can.
Law isn't the only thing keeping your country together. If it were it would be very worrying.
[QUOTE=Kylel999;51745400]Seceding is considered an act of treason. It doesn't matter how pro independence their politicians will be, because if the government doesn't OK the secession then it's a no-go. If there was some crazy revolution/resistance the area would likely be occupied by the national guard or something[/QUOTE]
does it matter if its treason honestly? whats the great harm (like to the extent it counts as treason) to come to the USA if one of the states decides to leave?
if the place is consistently pro independence and wants to leave because everybody there hates being part of America, why can you not let them go?
americans:
taiwan can be its own country if it wants to !!!
california can't secede it's ILLEGAL !!!
[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51745893]americans:
taiwan can be its own country if it wants to !!!
california can't secede it's ILLEGAL !!![/QUOTE]
Taiwan already is its own country, you dingus.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51743361]there's a very clear and qualitative difference between nations/countries and towns/citizens though[/QUOTE]
If there is, you didn't demonstrate any in your post. If the only thing standing in the way of independence for Suffolk is the fact that the UK government will retaliate, then what is there actually holding the British nation together? Are you really saying that the US is unique in preventing secession through force?
In any case, this 'if a state wants to rebel then you don't have a nation' argument kind of flies in the face of our actual history. You may note that we had an honest-to-god civil war over this issue, and less than a century later the country was pretty well united for multiple World Wars and other issues. It's not like the fact that some people are sufficiently upset by recent politics that they would seek independence means there is no longer any of the national commonality you described in your post.
By the way, how do you feel about Northern Ireland?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51743361]no i mean they were fighting against a colonial overlord (britain). the british then sent an army to quash the rebellion. what difference is there between that and washington DC sending an army to say hawaii to put down the rebellion?[/QUOTE]
Not much, and I don't see your point. The colonies had to fight to establish their independence, and any secessionist movement would have to fight to establish its independence. Unless you can find me primary sources from the founding fathers complaining that it's unfair that the King didn't just let them go, I don't see the hypocrisy you seem to be alleging. They recognized that they were going to have to fight for independence.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51735834]It's rather childish to want to secede suddenly just because your presidential candidate (who's up for voting again in just 4 years) went into office.
In 1860, there was a plurality of issues in the states that Lincoln's election pretty much became the climax of. In 2016, the only issue California has with Trump is that he's Trump and nothing more.[/QUOTE]
uh
what
do you really think people hate Trump just because he's Trump?
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;51745920]Taiwan already is its own country, you dingus.[/QUOTE]
And its not even separatist one ether.
[QUOTE=elowin;51746330]uh
what
do you really think people hate Trump just because he's Trump?[/QUOTE]
I'm certain there's a sizable chunk of people that do, yes.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.