How Would You Feel/What Would Think: Ceding from the Union?

[JetPotato]

Not for Republicans.

They love this ruling. They see it as a huge talking point for the Nov. Elections and their chance to regain power for themselves.

Now, we both know they won't/can't actually repeal Obamacare. But to a Republican, this ruling is awesome. The loss of freedom to the individual doesn't really, truly, concern them.

Only how this helps their election chances in Nov.

A pox on both their houses.

You're probably correct in the assessment.

But they are sadly, sadly mistaken. This does not and will not change a single vote. People who care enough about this issue to even pay attention to this had already made up their minds.

The smart move now is to accept defeat and wait... but as we know, they rarely make the smart move.

[freestater]

For whatever reason what jumps to mind is the military and what a cluster-**** that would create. Its the one thing we do pretty good on a Federal level.

It's one thing to have differences over money and ideology but everyone I know loves the protection of the military.

What do we do when the new "country" gets attacked?

Force is the ONLY thing the govt. does "pretty good".

[quantum]

Absolutely



The people who actually understand what this decision means were already galvanized. They understand and they have done all they can now. This isn't going to suddenly wake up the ignorant part of the population to suddenly rise up for the cause of liberty.

It's time to wave the white flag and accept defeat.

This was inevitable. Everything is cyclical - things are going to get far worse before they ever get better.

The best you can do now is take care of yourself, take care of your family and ignore the outside. Live your time here, enjoy it to its fullest, and die. But prepare your children and grandchildren. Educate them on history and don't allow them to be distorted by aggressive politics. Perhaps one day they will have more power to do things that you and I can not and will not be able to do.

We've lost. But there's no use in crying over spilled milk.

**** that, dude. Never give up, never surrender. Germans bombing Pearl Harbor, and all that. Its not over till we say its over.

Can't think of anymore movie quotes. But seriously, this is a motivator.

[JetPotato]

**** that, dude. Never give up, never surrender. Germans bombing Pearl Harbor, and all that. Its not over till we say its over.

Can't think of anymore movie quotes. But seriously, this is a motivator.

Sorry, q. It's over.

The only way to fix this now is from scratch. Total destruction followed by a rebuild. Band aids are no longer going to work. That's all Romney is, but we're gushing from the jugular.

We're better off letting this law go into full effect. And every other Obama policy. Might as well give him another 4 years. Then just sit back and let it all implode. Because it will, bank on it. Then, maybe then, will the people out there celebrating today stop and consider the consequences of their actions beyond their little campaign slogans.

Only when we reach sufficient awareness of our own stupidity will we ever be able to move forward together.

[Winstonbiggs]

So the State has no sovreignty after they've signed the Constitution, meaning no matter what happens, the free people of a State can NEVER choose something different via Democracy?

One in, in forever? Even if (hypothetically of course) 99.998% of voters voted to leave the Union?

That is a VERY interesting position.



Depends on how you define Democracy, and how much you trust certain nations who claimed some form of Democratic representation.

But it brings it back to your first reply. Once in, in forever, regardless of the will of the people?

I'm curious, as an added question, if the States truly have no sovreignty, and are merely administrative dept.s of an All-powerful Federal State, why have States at all? Why have local Govt., why not simply have local representaives of a larger Federal Govt.? Or assigned adminsitrators by the Executive branch?

What purpose does a State Govt. serve if that State Govt. has no sovreignty and hence no real authority vs. the Federal Govt, a Govt. they can never leave and never overrule?

Are you a citizen of the State you happen to live in or a citizen of the US? As someone who has citizenship I don't believe any state has the power to remove themselves and their citizens from that compact. I can move and work anywhere within the borders, own property, etc. No State can or should be able take away my rights of citizenship.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Are you a citizen of the State you happen to live in or a citizen of the US? As someone who has citizenship I don't believe any state has the power to remove themselves and their citizens from that compact. I can move and work anywhere within the borders, own property, etc. No State can or should be able take away my rights of citizenship.

What is the compact between the US and non-citizens?

[Winstonbiggs]

What is the compact between the US and non-citizens?

Welfare, education, child tax credits, health care, the right to vote.

[Warfish]

Are you a citizen of the State you happen to live in or a citizen of the US?

I am a citizen of both.

As someone who has citizenship I don't believe any state has the power to remove themselves and their citizens from that compact.

And 70% Americans "belive" in angels. Belief is irrelavant, Law and the potential subsequent use of Force and counterforce are what counts.

As Doggin has said, and I tend to reluctantly agree, there is no legal mechanic in our Law to leave the Union unilaterally. It would require both the break-off region AND the U.S> Federal Govt. to approve any succession.

That is supported by the Civil War. Even if 100% of the citizens of Region X wanted to, the ideals of democracy, liberty and the human right that is freedom of self-determination would not matter whatsoever in such a desire without the approval of the to-be-left-Nation as a whole.

But if that population engaged in the use of enough force, that would be the only route to leaving the Union. The same exact way we left the British Empire. Without use of force, we're all eating mince pie today.

No State can or should be able take away my rights of citizenship.

And none would. In any such sceanario, it would be up to the Untied States (sans whatever section left in this hypothetical) if your citizenship was retained or revoked or not, not the break-off nascient nationstate.

The breakoff nationstate could/would only have power to determine your citizenship options with them for their residents, should they wish to take advantage. Certainly, "U.S. loyalists" may not even be offered citizenship int he first place.

For example, in the U.S. Revolutionary War, the British considered all Americans to still be British Citizens, and at least a number of them left for England at the outbreak of War and never returned, living their and their offsprings lives as loyal British subjects in Britain.

[Winstonbiggs]

I am a citizen of both.



And 70% Americans "belive" in angels. Belief is irrelavant, Law and the potential subsequent use of Force and counterforce are what counts.

As Doggin has said, and I tend to reluctantly agree, there is no legal mechanic in our Law to leave the Union unilaterally. It would require both the break-off region AND the U.S> Federal Govt. to approve any succession.

That is supported by the Civil War. Even if 100% of the citizens of Region X wanted to, the ideals of democracy, liberty and the human right that is freedom of self-determination would not matter whatsoever in such a desire without the approval of the to-be-left-Nation as a whole.

But if that population engaged in the use of enough force, that would be the only route to leaving the Union. The same exact way we left the British Empire. Without use of force, we're all eating mince pie today.



And none would. In any such sceanario, it would be up to the Untied States (sans whatever section left in this hypothetical) if your citizenship was retained or revoked or not, not the break-off nascient nationstate.

The breakoff nationstate could/would only have power to determine your citizenship options with them for their residents, should they wish to take advantage. Certainly, "U.S. loyalists" may not even be offered citizenship int he first place.

For example, in the U.S. Revolutionary War, the British considered all Americans to still be British Citizens, and at least a number of them left for England at the outbreak of War and never returned, living their and their offsprings lives as loyal British subjects in Britain.

If the Hawai 5-O defeates the US military granted we might have 49 stars. There is no break off from the US without the US defending it's borders.

[Warfish]

If the Hawai 5-O defeates the US military granted we might have 49 stars. There is no break off from the US without the US defending it's borders.

Naaa, we'll just make DC a State.

Probably gonna happen eventually anyway.

Then we're back to 50.

[majormajor42]

Agreed. Obama in a landslide IMO. Was my opinion back then, definitely is today.

I also should point out that if Doggin IS right in his argument, then the U.S. Revolution was and is illegal (the Colonies had no right under British Law to leave). What that of course points out is that violent revolution > law when it coems to such things, and as much as we value democracy and the will or people and rule of law, the real power is in none of those things. It's in violence and the will to express it.

It's coming.

great.

Anyway...
Didn't Quebec have a vote to leave Canada a decade or so ago (edit:1995)? They voted not to leave. I'm not sure how close it was (very close) but it is interesting that there are avenues within their constitution to allow such a thing. Does the US not have those same avenues?

But I really don't think there is anything close to a 51% majority in any single state to leave the union so it never really gets discussed seriously (no offense to minor conversations that have taken place).

To those that may be in favor of leaving, do they feel that it must be a State as the smallest body that can leave? why not a county or town? Must at least 51% of the population of that State/county/town want to leave? There may be ways that a strong 30% minority to get their way perhaps?

Still would like Warfish's take on Seasteading, especially now that he has what looks like the Great White Fleet as his sig. Look it up and tell me what you think. Is it really a Libertarian dream?

[acepepe]

Take care Texas, Mexico would take Texas in a few weeks.

Dems fightin words!!!! We Texans would own the land of Mexico and you North Eastern Libs would get the peoples mang.

[majormajor42]

But if that population engaged in the use of enough force, that would be the only route to leaving the Union. The same exact way we left the British Empire. Without use of force, we're all eating mince pie today.

Oh Canada.

They didn't use force to do it although there was some violence in decades past.

But I'm beginning to see your points. I'm beginning to think that any new secession would require violence simply because it is our tradition.