Yeah.
SNP expansion was the result of Scotland’s recent independence initiative. Cut Labor rolls to insignificance, and set London adrift in a Toryland that rolls all the way to Caledonia.
1 Like
You’ll have to explain this to me. 
3 Likes
Gestures are fun and sometimes useful but unless you want a shooting war, you’ll need the backing of the us govt (consent of the states at the least, my wild ass guess is this could be done by legislative action but I suppose we won’t find out until it happens once)
1 Like
As a Southerner and someone that noses into history? California is too dependant on the rest of the nation and secession isn’t legal… Not even for Texas.
1 Like
A cool as this sounds to people on both sides of the political fence, I wouldn’t recommend it. I mean, historically a bunch of countries lumped together have less peace than if unified under one nation or union. See Europe.
3 Likes
Agreed. I live in a Red state and I hope they leave the US soon. I just need to get out before that happens (though where I live is pretty blue so maybe it would be like Berlin during the Cold War).
1 Like
One eighth. I think.
1 Like
same here. It just doesn’t seem to be very purple any longer.
Though if Texas wanted to leave, I would be good with that.
2 Likes
It already requires a passport for me to go anywhere reasonable or desirable. 
1 Like
I will, once I finish choking down this bit of grilled fois gras
Just going by the electoral college distribution, 1/8th is closer, yeah. Taking the 438 electors distributed by population and dividing by 8 gives you 54.75. California had 53 population-assigned electors in the 2016 election.
(Actual population math from 2014 says it’s somewhere between 1/8th and 1/9th, so… the system works?)
Welcome to some of the questions brexit “leavers” are just starting to ask themselves …
4 Likes
“Don’t mess with Texas!” originally was an anti-littering slogan, believe it or not.
1 Like
I personally think that history is pretty conclusive about any kind of nationalism. If you live in the US or not (and I don’t) I think now is the time to defend civic rights and - as passé as it might sound - universal values and not fight for some more of the same shit that is largely to blame for the mess we are all in.
4 Likes
Yep, it’s more urban vs. rural rather than red vs. blue.
Why can’t we all just get along, as it were. Phooey. Of course, it’s all the tribal instincts, being deliberately manipulated by the rich for their own selfish benefit. (Of course that’s just my class vs. class tribalism speaking – but I think that’s real battle.)
3 Likes
I’m not surprised… same with here in ATL, with the rest of the state, I’m sure. Of course, the people in those places have the same perception of us in ATL or California.
2 Likes
Right we fought a war to determine that particular question. And the resolute winner was no secession. As a result there’s no legal process allowing Secession. So any attempt needs the full backing of the federal government and probably 2/3 of state governments to create one. If they hope to avoid a military break.
There’s a reason why so many of these things are backed by the Russians and European far right nationalist groups. A serious attempt at secession means a 2nd American civil war. And likely needs more than one state to cooperate on breaking off.
This isn’t like the EU. Or even the UK. Where you’ve got multiple, sovereign nations with clear legal processes for separation. Secession means break away state. Break away state means military conflict.
7 Likes
Of course, in my mind, that immediately makes is suspect. It does make it seem as if it’s a plot to destroy the US through, well, FUD basically. Revenge for the Cold War, I guess.
2 Likes
I don’t know. It’s still the primary way in which we instill rights to people, how the world functions. Nationalism has also driven some effective anti-colonial movements over the years. I think nationalism is like any other ideology, in that it’s how it’s used that matters and the end result. If you’re using it to ethnically cleanse, murder, or define against, that’s a problem. A national identity that is built on a rigid and exclusive identity can easily shift into that, given the right circumstances. But there are competing ways of thinking about national identity that can be useful and positive. As long as it’s the major way of organizing the world, we have to work within that framework while thinking through and pushing for alternatives.
That being said, I’m not a fan of nationalism or don’t think that it’s the best way to organize society, so on that we agree. A universal set of rights for all, an identity set that you can carry with you no matter where you go is a great idea. Personally, I think that borders should all be open and that states should have to compete for citizens. But of course, as long as economic inequality exists, that only benefits those who can afford to move about.
6 Likes
I’m agreeing with @enso that “federalism in name only” is a likely outcome, and I don’t have a problem with that. I’ve lately been asking myself: why did we do healthcare at the federal level? Why do we keep trying to compromise with people who are committed to diametrically opposite values?
The practical problems with outright succession are numerous. Even if California could pull it off, it would then find itself sharing a border with a well-armed, authoritarian dystopia—a similar foreign policy position to, say, Ukraine. Moreover, since the divide is largely urban-rural, the same forces that pulled the US apart could also pull California apart—and there are business interests with a vested interest in doing so. In NY the existing (albeit largely defunct) succession movements aren’t to separate NY State from the USA, but to separate Upstate NY from Long Island.
That having been said, a statement of intent to leave the union could end in greater autonomy for California and other states that may follow suit. I’m perfectly happy to grant people in Kansas the freedom to be backward if that means that New York can move forward.
4 Likes
