T Nation

State Secession Thought Experiment?


#21

Yeah that seems to be the only real opinion I can find about secession and whether or not it can happen without force.

It does make sense imo. Short of a 100% voter buyin, secession would be stripping the citizens of their federal rights, jurisdiction, etcetc.

I think in the case of CA a lot of people just hate the way they run their elections for Congress


#22

Local issues.

I suppose that’s true.


#23

Like when to hold school board meetings? Here in murica, there are almost no “local issues” anymore. There are issues decided by Congress, and dictates handed down by the Supremes.


#24

I’m sure that’s partly why this was written, by Lord Acton of England, in a letter to Robert Lee(obligatory “murica rules!” statement: I’m sure ol’ Lord Acton was really just bemoaning the loss of African-American— wrote “black” first-the horrors— slavery.):

“Without presuming to decide the purely legal question, on which it seems evident to me from Madison’s and Hamilton’s papers that the Fathers of the Constitution were not agreed, I saw in State Rights the only availing check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will, and secession filled me with hope, not as the destruction but as the redemption of Democracy. The institutions of your Republic have not exercised on the old world the salutary and liberating influence which ought to have belonged to them, by reason of those defects and abuses of principle which the Confederate Constitution was expressly and wisely calculated to remedy. I believed that the example of that great Reform would have blessed all the races of mankind by establishing true freedom purged of the native dangers and disorders of Republics. Therefore I deemed that you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization; and I mourn for the stake which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo.”


#25

If I was Russia and I saw CA secede…I’d be like the creepy old guy at the park talking to the kid who ran away from home…

Why not just invade CA, adopt it’s economy, or hold it hostage against the US? Or blow up one of the nuke silos while you’re in there crashing the party.


#26

That brings up a good point. We’d be obligated to defend them to maintain hegemony on this continent.


#27

The biggest one I can think of is state gun laws (western MD has talked about breaking off into a new state because MD is ridiculous) and state/local taxes (same).


#28

I’d guess they’d join NATO.


#29

Same difference.


#30

Meant to quote @carbiduis


#31

The first has pretty much been decided by the Supremes and Congress. There are some disagreements over minutiae, I guess, on which local decisions are permitted. I guess State taxes are an issue, even though the Feds are still gonna take what they want.


#32

Eh, odds are WA and OR would join up with CA. Now the west coast country owns all trade to Asia, Alaska oil, water, nuclear subs, a large military etc.

The rest of America would have to play nice to avoid trade and energy blockades and financial ruin.


#33

It does indirectly via constitutional convention (under Article V). Bring the interested parties to the table and negotiate an exit.


#34

Can I take that to mean it cannot be done without explicit consent from both parties?


#35

That is assuming that the companies that have done tremendously well in a capitalist nation would want to take their chances with what ever system came next to that region, and that they would somehow keep all of the federally owned military/industrial infrastructure.

I’m pretty sure that subs are and can be built elsewhere, and in fact have seen and worked in the facility where one was being built.


#36

On top of this, why in God’s name would any of the corps that make CA the powerhouse it is choose to remain in the breakaway area given how much of a hit they’d have to take.

All of silicon valley, virtually every publicly traded company, the majority of service companies that do more business outside the breakaway than in. Those guys get off the sinking ship day 1.

And obviously the US govt would want to incentivize them to leave CA. They can make deals far beyond the reach of any breakaway group


#37

I think it would be tough to relocate those company’s HQs and human capital elsewhere as long as the system of government and regulations stayed similar. The world is too reliant on them to simply be able to do without so they’d still do business. Plus, I would imagine those companies would have tremendous say and sway with the new govt… Which would be very interesting.

And yeah there are the 3 sub bases, only 1 would be in the new country, but that’s all you’d need. Those systems are truly doomsday, Trump card weapons that will severely discourage any military threat to it’s new sovergnity.


#38

Why would it be difficult?

I’ll give you this one. Anyone that stays would have major clout.

Do the states have access to the nuclear codes? Why would you think they would get to keep any nuclear and/or other federal arms?


#39

Oh that could get weird! Orwellian weird! Imagine a real corporatocracy. Everybody shops at Amazon. Microsoft, Apple, and Alphabet all have their own ecospheres. You need permission of a supervisor to make babies.

… And people think workplace politics are irritating now!


#40

"Can I come inside today boss?
“You know the policy Johnson! Pull out!”