Any Chance of Secessions? And if so, which would be likely be the first State? I say Texas...
The first secession will not be a state, it will be a gang.
I'm betting on Los Zetas.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
If I may interject my personal opinion into this topic I would like to say that I don't see why people enamor over the idea of secession so much. It's not like the Civil War was such a grand idea. It puts brother against brother and sister against sister. I'd much rather see a full-scale revolution rather than secession. A full-scale secession can only lead to civil war and conflict. A revolution doesn't necessarily have to be violent.
All is needed is a change on thinking in a large scale and if we can get the majority of Americans to support a constitutionally limited government based on the rule of law. We would restrain the government from interfering with individual choice be it our economic decisions or with morality. A secession would just turn away, in my view, the people that would rather see a full-scale revolution of values, and, principles in our country.
viresh amin: Any Chance of Secessions? And if so, which would be likely be the first State? I say Texas...
California, Texas, Nevada, New Hampshire are my top picks and in that order.
Personal Secession - Starting Now
There is no need to wait for a group of individuals, such as a state , in order to "secede"- from anything.
For one thing, what you envision might never happen, and even if it did, it does not mean that that [collective] action would actually do you any good.
It is far easier for the individual to succeed alone.
Acting alone also means that you can accomplish a lot more,go a lot further in a lot less time, and most importantly you can start your journey today, because nobody has to be persuaded to agree with you in order for you to take that first step.
It also means you will have far greater chance of meeting your own exact standards for personal freedom and secession, instead of compromising your standards for the imagined benefits of group [ie socialized] action.
If you would like to discuss these ideas further, please private message me.
Regards, onebornfree
For more information about onebornfree, please see profile.[ i.e. click on forum name "onebornfree"].
viresh amin:Any Chance of Secessions? And if so, which would be likely be the first State? I say Texas...
I'm willing to bet that none of the states will out right say to the feds "screw you, we are breaking it off"! I think it will be more of a "soft secession", with states gradually drifting away from listening to the federales, and the federal government being too broke or powerful to prevent it. This is already beginning to happen (medical marijuana laws, assault weapons bans), and considering how broke most states are these days, it is only a matter of time before federal education standards, interstate regulations, etc. just begin to get ignored out of lack of funds to adhere to them.
Jackson LaRose: viresh amin:Any Chance of Secessions? And if so, which would be likely be the first State? I say Texas... I'm willing to bet that none of the states will out right say to the feds "screw you, we are breaking it off"! I think it will be more of a "soft secession", with states gradually drifting away from listening to the federales, and the federal government being too broke or powerful to prevent it. This is already beginning to happen (medical marijuana laws, assault weapons bans), and considering how broke most states are these days, it is only a matter of time before federal education standards, interstate regulations, etc. just begin to get ignored out of lack of funds to adhere to them.
+1 for phrase "soft secession". Hopefully it continues to the point where it reaches a critical cultural mass.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
Nitroadict: +1 for phrase "soft secession". Hopefully it continues to the point where it reaches a critical cultural mass.
I don't think you can call shooting diplomatic personnel to be "soft" secession.
It just depends on how the state will react. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
Stranger: Nitroadict: +1 for phrase "soft secession". Hopefully it continues to the point where it reaches a critical cultural mass. I don't think you can call shooting diplomatic personnel to be "soft" secession.
I would if I wasn't referring to that incident at all. I was referring to the gradual process of more pro-secession attitudes amid states & the resulting legislation, such as states trying to salvage gun rights by requiring state made guns to have "Made in Idaho" & legislating against the federal government. If the process eventually continues to the point where it becomes a given to ignore a hilariously indebted federal government's regulations, I would call that soft-recession. But yeah, you're right regarding that story.
Texas will not secede. Why should it? The state has a vastly disproportionate influence in Washington and is set to pick up as many as five additional house seats after the next census. The oil industry is centered in Texas but their customer base is the whole country. Ditto the cotton and beef industries. So why secede? Over a few social issues? I don't see it.
If any state secedes it will be one that is not currently benefiting economically from being in the union. One or more of the New England states perhaps. They are mostly net tax payers now and are set to lose representation after the next census, which will probably make their situation even worse.
No. While individual citizens rightly believe cutting ties with Washington DC is a nice way of rolling back Leviathan don't forget the crooks residing in your State capitol, in the myriad of State-connected agencies, even in your own home town. They have formed a symbiotic relationship with the Federal government and are much more dangerous to the secessionist cause than the Federal armed forces. Even if they don't carry a gun.
Then there's the California issue: the State has been broke for years. It has shown as much disregard for balanced budgets as much maligned Greece. Yet nobody is seriously worried as Arnie's half-baked attempts at keeping State deficits under control prove. Why is that? California is backed by the mighty Federal Reserve and the even mightier US government. Should California screw it up really big time Uncle Sam would automatically take over. No State parasite would lose his job, no public school-addict would have a withdrawal crisis. At very best a few officials will be given a Maoist style trial, something that's sure to take in the gullible public always clamoring for a single scapegoat instead of looking into the mirror, and life would go. Why take more responsibility for your actions when Santa Claus will drop through the chimney to save you?
Kakugo: viresh amin: Any Chance of Secessions? And if so, which would be likely be the first State? I say Texas... No. While individual citizens rightly believe cutting ties with Washington DC is a nice way of rolling back Leviathan don't forget the crooks residing in your State capitol, in the myriad of State-connected agencies, even in your own home town. They have formed a symbiotic relationship with the Federal government and are much more dangerous to the secessionist cause than the Federal armed forces. Even if they don't carry a gun. Then there's the California issue: the State has been broke for years. It has shown as much disregard for balanced budgets as much maligned Greece. Yet nobody is seriously worried as Arnie's half-baked attempts at keeping State deficits under control prove. Why is that? California is backed by the mighty Federal Reserve and the even mightier US government. Should California screw it up really big time Uncle Sam would automatically take over. No State parasite would lose his job, no public school-addict would have a withdrawal crisis. At very best a few officials will be given a Maoist style trial, something that's sure to take in the gullible public always clamoring for a single scapegoat instead of looking into the mirror, and life would go. Why take more responsibility for your actions when Santa Claus will drop through the chimney to save you?
but surely something like that would only serve as a short term fix, and it would seem like having to foot part of the bill for California would make it even more likely for one of Vermont, NH, or Maine (who I think already tried waaaay back in the day) to try and leave.
What it will come down to is citizens just starting to ignore the Federal Government.
Kakugo:Should California screw it up really big time Uncle Sam would automatically take over. No State parasite would lose his job, no public school-addict would have a withdrawal crisis.
That's a big millstone around Leviathan's neck.
wiki:California's economy is the largest of any state in the US, and is the eighth largest economy in the world.[1][2]As of 2008, the gross state product (GSP) is about $1.85 trillion, which is 13% of the United States gross domestic product (GDP).
How long will the feds be financially be able to maintain this without going hyperinflation supernova? How long after that before the dollar is dumped as the international currency of exchange? How long before China and the house of Saud begin calling those bonds in? One can only hope that California becomes district of Columbia west. Just make sure you have lots of ammo and dry goods handy.
Another thing about the California issue: the feds already denied any funding to help the state. I think Obama is trying to pull a Ford. President Ford denied to extend a loan to New York city when it was going broke. Within a decade, it was in much better shape because it had to bring in austerity measures to keep from going broke.
Joe: but surely something like that would only serve as a short term fix, and it would seem like having to foot part of the bill for California would make it even more likely for one of Vermont, NH, or Maine (who I think already tried waaaay back in the day) to try and leave.
Governments are very good at making short term fixes work for decades to an end. In fact I am still bailing out the bloated regions down south my grandfather (may God have mercy on his soul) was bailing out decades ago. The big problem with this situation is that's a whole lot like a tumor: left unchecked it will spread to the whole organism and kill it. Sure, secession can prevent that but I can assure you most persons are so downright terrified and lazy with it that they'd rather drown than abandon ship and swim with their own strength. Government propaganda helped out: nobody ever mentions how the presidents of the Czech Republic and Slovakia shook hands, raised the respective flags and had a toast at the two newborn nations while both sides of the border were celebrating. It's always Serbs, Croats and Muslims cutting each other to bits. Or in the the case of the US Confederates and Federals blasting each other away with Miniè rifles.
Trust somebody who has been a secessionist since he was 17!
On a semi-related note, congratulations to the free state project. They have reached 10,000 members.
they said we would have an unfair fun advantage
Jackson LaRose:it is only a matter of time before federal education standards, interstate regulations, etc. just begin to get ignored out of lack of funds to adhere to them.
It is beginning already. Our local high school needs updates to meet federal standards, $5 million worth. It was voted down. So now what - the Feds send the FBI to close the school?
tfr000:It is beginning already. Our local high school needs updates to meet federal standards, $5 million worth. It was voted down. So now what - the Feds send the FBI to close the school?
Ah, that is great news. A great example of how regulation and law are just ink on paper if they aren't enforced.