Should states be allowed to divorce the union?

[Pat H]

Those opposing freedom of association, and its close cousin, self government; almost always burden threads with references to slavery. Let's not let that happen in this one.

No one is talking about an exclusive southern states secession nor a return to slavery, so please stop mentioning it.

A study of the US should reveal to most folks that we have about four or five natural cultural regions that should probably be either semi-autonomous, or autonomous regions under an overall federal government of substantially reduced power; or fully sovereign nations with much close cultural ties.

For example; southern California, Arizona, and New Mexico have natural ties. Likewise, Oregon, Washington, and northern California have many mutual alliances already. Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Nevade, perhaps the Dakotas are another.

I think that with some imagination, others of you can think of new regional alliances that make sense, and would better respond to the needs of the people in those regions than is possible with a central, all powerful government.

 

[Perldog007]

What about the Conch Republic (Key West)???? DIdn't they vote to succeed??

That's the local legend down there anyhow.

http://www.conchrepublic.com/history.htm

 

[HKuser]

Those who are in favor or secession started waxing grandiloquent about old Dixie, I just told them, gently, that they were crazier than landfill rats, and they are. Not as crazy as someone suggesting that states nuke each other, but close. When this forum is on the nightly news with the talking heads referencing the bloodthirsty, insane posts it won't be mine they're talking about. What kind of representative of gun owners are you being?

Those opposing freedom of association, and its close cousin, self government; almost always burden threads with references to slavery. Let's not let that happen in this one.

No one is talking about an exclusive southern states secession nor a return to slavery, so please stop mentioning it.

 

[obxned]

Can we require Californica to leave?

 

[Perldog007]

I didn't find anybody in the conch rebulic to be bloodthirsty, so if anybody wants to split from the union, follow the Key West example.

The only thing about Key West that scares me is the LE down thar. They are so laid back and helpful, I think if anybody got them riled up it would be sad times for sure. Not the kind of Peace Officers I would ever want to cross.

Seriously, the keys had a valid beef, the border patrol cut them off from the mainland. They reacted in a provocative yet peaceful manner and the beef was resolved, or at least abated.

 

[miboso]

When this forum is on the nightly news with the talking heads referencing the bloodthirsty, insane posts

The only posters referencing blood and violence are those that oppose secession.
There is no reason that a secession cannot be peaceful. Correction, I guess tyranny would be one reason.

 

[Redworm]

Can we require Californica to leave?

only if you want to strangle the US economy because it accounts for 13% of our GDP

 

[Thumper]

Quote:
Can we require Californica to leave?

only if you want to strangle the US economy because it accounts for 13% of our GDP

Fair enough. I'm in.

 

[Lawyer Daggit]

There is no way the federal government would allow it. Wealth is not evenly spread between the states. If one tried to do it I think it would very quickly be subject to a blockade and an invasion, after all, this was what your Civil War was really about.

 

[Pat H]

The south was far richer than the north was in your example, that's true.

We, as individual regions, have a hugely different set of circumstances today. Dividing the country into four more or less contiguous regions one finds that each region is more or less comparable in population size, GDP, with land area being biased towards the western states as expected.

I should think that since conflict would be so unproductive and harmful that most Americans would oppose the centralizing state doing anything militarily.

 

[rrtex1]

Why secede? We have a great country founded on principals and beliefs that have held up for a very long time.
The problem as I see is two fold. First there are people in this country that want power to abuse the rest with. They act like they are caring and loving people that only want to help others but in reality they don't, but they sure like the power. The second is that we let them. We watch our liberties disappear, our principals get stomped on and our beliefs questioned. We do nothing, we complain, but we do nothing. Look at the current election, we are allowing liberals and the biased media to tell us what we think, what is right and how we should act. We know better, yet we do nothing.
I talked to my 85 yo grandfather recently and asked him what was different from now and when he was younger. He told me that back in the 30's and 40's people were proud of their country. He stated that it was not about "what's in it for me" but more "what can I do for others". He told me that he was proud to volunteer for WW2 even though he did not understand what the war was about.

Watch what is going on around us, we are being run by the few versus the populous. Watch how people will vote without understanding who they are voting for. Talk to people and see that they truly believe in things that we know to be untrue. I am amazed and deeply saddened by what I see.

 

[The Tourist]

He told me that back in the 30's and 40's people were proud of their country. He stated that it was not about "what's in it for me" but more "what can I do for others".

Same in my family. And there was also something different about the way they felt about the life this country gave to them. They gladly fought facism.

However, I don't see that now, even in isolated examples. All I see is ungrateful people pouring across the border to suck up benefits denied them in their native country. I had great respect for the Cubans who went back to fight Castro. Who fought Vicente Fox?

Now match the world you see to the grandparents you knew. Mine were humbled by the freedom and unprecedented chance to better themselves. I can cite no relative of mine who ever took any government hand out. This was so engrained into my upbringing that the first time I drew unemployment compensation I thought I was on welfare.

Speaking of my joke about "firing" a state, I recently had a serious debate with a friend about the idea of Aztalan, if I'm spelling that correctly. It's the idea that many have about returning some southern states to Mexico.

If this idea would have been floated out in the 1930's I would accept the change regretfully, but have no doubt about hard working people applying their skills amid freedom.

Now I'm afraid to say that once Aztalan citizens realized that their new country did not receive benefits as in an American state, they would just expatriate into a different American area.

I have a far different view now of secession vs. cutting one's losses.

 

[ronl]

The thought of secession is an interesting one. States do have the Constitutional right. Sounds pretty good to me as I am tired of being ruled by Cali. and NY., especially where my gun rights are concerned.

 

[Master Blaster]

States love the money they get from the federal government.
If they left the Union they would loose, Medicaid and medicare and HUD and half of their AFDC and Food stamp programs, not to mention highway funds.

This would be especially problematic for large states and for poor states.

Then there was that civil war thing in 1860-1865, sort of set a precedent dont ya think??

 

[Hugh Damright]

I don't understand why some people think that the "civil war" ended the right of secession. It seems that yankees forgot to amend our Constitution at the point of a bayonet to say that there is no right to secession, and even if they had, the right to alter or to abolish government is inalienable. The Declaration of Independence says that a people have a right to alter/abolish their government, and that specifically means secession. My Virginia BOR also declares that the majority of Virginians have a right to alter or to abolish our government. How is it that people just turn their backs on our founding principles and embrace yankee war propaganda? As yankees like to keep saying, "the war is over", so maybe it's time to get over the war propaganda and embrace some real values.

 

[Pat H]

States love the money they get from the federal government.

Since no money will be leaving a seceded state to be wasted at the federal level, that will quickly become moot. The federal government only has the money it can borrow or steal, printing fiat currency would quickly end it's ability to function.

If they left the Union they would loose, Medicaid and medicare and HUD and half of their AFDC and Food stamp programs, not to mention highway funds.

Most of those programs are in strong disfavor within states that are considering secession. Not all though, Vermont is very socialist and proud of it, they may still secede. I don't know much about Vermont's economy, but I do recognized their right of secession.

This would be especially problematic for large states and for poor states.

I don't think there are any poor states in America.

Then there was that civil war thing in 1860-1865, sort of set a precedent dont ya think??

That war didn't have much precedent of which to be proud. Over 600,000 men died fighting it and as many as 350,000 civilians died during it or immediately afterwards from its effects.

There's no need for resistance to secession. We must respect the right of secession.

 

[Al Norris]

Until or unless the Supreme Court rewrites Texas vs White, the manner of leaving the union is binding upon all the States.

Get back to me when you've read that decision.

ETA: Hugh, your constant reference to anything not of the "South" as "yankees" is not only tiresome but denigrating. Those of us "out west" are of the cowboy genre. A product wholly different than anything the North or South ever envisioned.

 

[Pat H]

Texas v. White sets no legitimate restriction upon the right of secession. It was a decision of convenience by a post War Against Southern Independence court, it has no Constitutional basis of any kind. It was and remains one more in a monumental list of corrupt court decisions made from whole cloth. The case was effectively debunked in Charles Adams book.

Just as we gun owners, most of us at any rate, would ignore a national or even statewide demand to turn in our firearms because we know we have the absolute right to possess them, the right for a state to secede from the Union was long recognized prior to Lincoln's murderous and illegal assault, court cases in support of Lincoln's war notwithstanding.

I did live in Montana for four years, 1969-73, and it is different than the east, either south or north, but I'd say that if it were to align itself with one or the other of the eastern parts of the country, the southern states would be the most likely friend.

 

[Al Norris]

Texas v. White sets no legitimate restriction upon the right of secession.

Until you come to grips with the idea that we are a nation of law, you're never going to get out of that musty old mold you've fitted yourself with.

Until superceded by another ruling, it is legitimate law. Anything else is hyperbole.

I did live in Montana for four years, 1969-73, and it is different than the east, either south or north,

That, right there, is where you should have stopped.

 

[Yellowfin]

Pending election results we may see good reason for secession to become a more viable discussion. Also H.R. 1955 gives good reason, as such suggests that there are people in DC who see it being an issue, which makes me think there's even more reason to be suspicious of them.