# I joined, and pledged support to Yes California today. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 11, 2016, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467 "2016-11-11T04:44:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/401 "2016-11-22T21:33:25Z")
The UN Charter, by its plain text, does not give California right to secession, does not obligate the United States to allow subnational secession, and even if it did, it doesn’t overrule the Supreme Court rulings on the matter. The right to self-representation under the UN is left up to the members to decide for themselves, and there’s no referee on this matter. There’s no UN requirement to let pieces of your country break away, nor has there ever been. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/402 "2016-11-22T21:34:43Z")
Note it was specifically denoted when the UN Charter was written, that the right to self-determination did not at all (and specifically did not) imply a right to secession: [link](http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1957&context=dlj) The U.S. wouldn’t even be dealing with a remote international incident whatsoever if it legally or physically blocked secession. There are UN members right now that are actively suppressing, with military force, secessionist movements, and very rarely does the UN even address the matter. When they do, it’s often to denounce the secessionists as terrorists, very occasionally they’ve come down on calling the member state’s actions war crimes or etc. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/403 "2016-11-22T21:43:26Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > So you have claimed multiple times. You’re most definitely wrong about this. The UN Charter doesn’t mean squat in this type of situation. And as I’ve pointed out, it’s not like no sub-national units have tried to break away since States signed the UN charter. Some countries have held referendums (United Kingdom, Canada), some countries have voluntarily broken up (Czechoslovakia, USSR), some are involved in wars of secession of varying degrees and activity (Ukraine, Georgia, Somalia, Turkey, Sri Lanka for a long time etc.) The UN’s response has never been to assert a right to secession that anyone is violating, and most of the time they’ve simply viewed these as internal issues best ignored by the UN. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/404 "2016-11-22T21:52:49Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Ah, the everybody is doing it defense. Sort of kills the high road argument the US loves to employ. Reality isn’t black or white. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/405 "2016-11-22T21:53:14Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > The UN Charter, by its plain text, does not give California right to secession, does not obligate the United States to allow subnational secession, and even if it did, it doesn’t overrule the Supreme Court rulings on the matter. > > The right to self-representation under the UN is left up to the members to decide for themselves, and there’s no referee on this matter. There’s no UN requirement to let pieces of your country break away, nor has there ever been. Here. Manifestations under the Aegis of the United Nations > **[Self-Determination](https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e873)** > > "Self-Determination" published on by Oxford University Press. 1. Self-Determination as a Binding Rule of International Law a (14) The principle of self-determination is binding upon the parties, whether they have adopted it as the basis or as a criterion for the settlement of a particular issue or dispute. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/406 "2016-11-22T21:54:58Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Prior to Congress _ratifying_ the UN Charter, that decision would apply. But Congress spoke when they agreed to the terms with respect to when a people can declare their desire to be self-governed. > > The decision you’re referring to specifically allows secession -if- Congress approves. Congress has, therefore, already approved. > > This is why the US will be in between the rock and the hard spot. It will take some real dancing on the world stage, with the world watching, to circumvent that approval. The UN can’t enforce anything on the US. Nothing. The UN exists because the great nations allow it to. ---
**Author:** ![Zero-syde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Zero-syde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zero-syde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/407 "2016-11-22T21:56:40Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > The UN can’t enforce anything on the US. Nothing. The UN exists because the great nations allow it to. I gotta say Morgenstern, you’re barking up the wrong tree with the UN. The UN is like a Mafia, and the US is like the Don. Yeah, there are major players like Russia and China, but the Mafia isn’t going to tell the Don what to do, and any player who tries is likely to get shot. Without US support, the UN folds. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/408 "2016-11-22T22:03:15Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > The US may be self-governing, but California isn’t. I’ve already pointed out why in no fewer than 4 different posts. Look Infra. > > The UN charter isn’t fulfilled. If our vote for independence isn’t accepted by the US government, proof positive that we’re NOT self-governed. > > PLEASE, don’t send us any more money. You’re sending us 16 billion less than we’re paying now. We’ll keep ours. you keep yours. > > The water? Again, 4 or 5 times infra. You planning to import water to all the military bases in CA? Do they need water? What about the Federal prisons? What about the Federal buildings hooked up to municipal water supplies? You planning on using CA water or trucking it in? California water is very expensive you know. > > Corrected on this? > The 1865 thing has been explained 4 or 5 times infra as it relates to this. > You’d be right if this was the 19th century. But your argument fails mid 20th century. Again, infra. What? How is the US self-governing if bound by UN rules? I guess it’s time for the US to leave the UN and not be bound by the UN’s rules. Now what authority do you appeal to? ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/409 "2016-11-22T22:04:05Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Note it was specifically denoted when the UN Charter was written, that the right to self-determination did not at all (and specifically did not) imply a right to secession: [link](http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1957&context=dlj) > > … An interesting fact to litigate. But there’s a problem. If it’s litigated in Federal court, that will proves CA isn’t self-governed, but the people are subject to an authority, and judges, that they most likely never voted for. If it’s litigated in an international tribunal, well, sort of proves CA is independent. I would expect that -(assuming)- this passes, there will be a list of countries ready to recognize CA as an independent nation, further complicating the issues faced by the US. I think a much better road for the US would be to recognize CA, bond with CA, and work with RoCA for the benefit of both nations. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/410 "2016-11-22T22:08:34Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > An interesting fact to litigate. > > But there’s a problem. > > If it’s litigated in Federal court, that will proves CA isn’t self-governed, but the people are subject to an authority, and judges, that they most likely never voted for. > > If it’s litigated in an international tribunal, well, sort of proves CA is independent. > > I would expect that -(assuming)- this passes, there will be a list of countries ready to recognize CA as an independent nation, further complicating the issues faced by the US. > > I think a much better road for the US would be to recognize CA, bond with CA, and work with RoCA for the benefit of both nations. When California county A has a beef with county B over where to put nuclear power plant #20 for desalination power what court will oversee that battle? That’ll be proof that county A and county B aren’t self governed and could secede. You really aren’t thinking the issue through in an intellectually consistent manner. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/411 "2016-11-22T22:18:20Z")
> [@Zero-syde](#): > > I gotta say Morgenstern, you’re barking up the wrong tree with the UN. > > The UN is like a Mafia, and the US is like the Don. Yeah, there are major players like Russia and China, but the Mafia isn’t going to tell the Don what to do, and any player who tries is likely to get shot. > > Without US support, the UN folds. I’ll bet Russia and China would have quite a time showing the hypocrisy of the US if it doesn’t play this according to Hoyle. Unfortunately, they’d be right in many respects. Use of military force being one. _Yes California announced today that it has accepted an invitation to represent the California Republic at a self-determination conference hosted by the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia on July 31 in Moscow. The conference will be dedicated to the struggle of different regions and nations fighting for their independence and self-determination. Entitled, “The Dialogue of Nations: The Right of Peoples to Self-Determination and Building a Multipolar World”, the conference will include representatives of Texas, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Catalonia, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Western Sahara, Veneto, Kurdistan, as well as the Californian independence movements._ ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/412 "2016-11-22T22:25:44Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > I’ll bet Russia and China would have quite a time showing the hypocrisy of the US if it doesn’t play this according to Hoyle. Unfortunately, they’d be right in many respects. Use of military force being one. > _Yes California announced today that it has accepted an invitation to represent the California Republic at a self-determination conference hosted by the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia on July 31 in Moscow. The conference will be dedicated to the struggle of different regions and nations fighting for their independence and self-determination. Entitled, “The Dialogue of Nations: The Right of Peoples to Self-Determination and Building a Multipolar World”, the conference will include representatives of Texas, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Catalonia, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Western Sahara, Veneto, Kurdistan, as well as the Californian independence movements._ You don’t know anything about Chinese politics or Russian for that matter if you think they are pro-secession. And they don’t have the navy to intervene if they wanted to. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/413 "2016-11-22T22:33:41Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > You don’t know anything about Chinese politics or Russian for that matter if you think they are pro-secession. And they don’t have the navy to intervene if they wanted to. You see military intervention as the answer to so many issues. It’s not. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/414 "2016-11-22T22:35:51Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > You see military intervention as the answer to so many issues. It’s not. It is for treason. Where do you live that has no police, no sheriff deputies, no state police, no marshals, no FBI? Every last one of those exist to maintain law and order via the threat of force. You just don’t get it. Are you one of those “sovereign citizens?” ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/415 "2016-11-22T23:05:32Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > If it’s litigated in an international tribunal, well, sort of proves CA is independent. Litigation in an international tribunal such as the ICJ requires state parties, which California is not. And nobody of consequence is going to recognize “independent California” given that it would harm commerce with the much-larger-and-populous remainder US. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/416 "2016-11-22T23:07:47Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > It is for treason. > > Where do you live that has no police, no sheriff deputies, no state police, no marshals, no FBI? Every last one of those exist to maintain law and order via the threat of force. You just don’t get it. > > Are you one of those “sovereign citizens?” I see. Force solves everything. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/417 "2016-11-22T23:10:34Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Litigation in an international tribunal such as the ICJ requires state parties, which California is not. And nobody of consequence is going to recognize “independent California” given that it would harm commerce with the much-larger-and-populous remainder US. Oh, I doubt that very much. California will continue exporting what it exports, importing what it imports. Nothing will change, except the last line of the address. ---
**Author:** ![Zero-syde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Zero-syde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zero-syde)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/418 "2016-11-22T23:31:25Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > It is for treason. There may be a way to thread the needle without defaulting to military force. A military outcome is the _most likely_ result, but that really depends on the scenario in play. I said as much in the other (related) thread: Right now, far less than 50% of Californians support secession. For that to flip to a majority or super majority willing and able to push the issue, the political landscape would have to be _massively_ changed. What’s going on in the other states? The US could crush any individual state, but if it’s exploding at all sides they might be forced to the bargaining table without firing a shot. > [@octopus](#): > > Where do you live that has no police, no sheriff deputies, no state police, no marshals, … Most of these are state agencies. As we’re assuming at _least_ a majority of Californians are in favor of the secession as would be required for this referendum to even matter, it stands to reason that the majority of these agencies would also align with the secessionists. > [@octopus](#): > > …no FBI? Every last one of those exist to maintain law and order via the threat of force. You just don’t get it. The FBI wouldn’t have the manpower to deal with that big of a population. It almost certainly would come down to the military for threat of force. But you’re correct in that the threat is there. > [@octopus](#): > > Are you one of those “sovereign citizens?” While I think Morgensten’s chosen avenue of approach is full of holes, comparing it to sovereign citizenry is like criticizing Trump’s presidential run on the grounds that his shoes resemble Hitlers. The argument itself is nonsensically flawed (massive false equivalence) and hardly begins to address any real issue. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/419 "2016-11-22T23:52:58Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > I would expect that -(assuming)- this passes, there will be a list of countries ready to recognize CA as an independent nation, further complicating the issues faced by the US. I’d be very surprised if a seceding CA got much international recognition at all. I can’t imagine the benefits of currying favor with CA would outweigh the consequences of pissing off the rest of America for most nations. > [@Morgenstern](#): > > I think a much better road for the US would be to recognize CA, bond with CA, and work with RoCA for the benefit of both nations. You’re free to think whatever you want, but unless you’re one of President Trump’s advisers, your opinion doesn’t much matter. > [@Morgenstern](#): > > Oh, I doubt that very much. California will continue exporting what it exports, importing what it imports. Nothing will change, except the last line of the address. Do you realize that stuff gets brought to ports in CA largely so that it can be distributed to the rest of America? If CA doesn’t have direct, free and unfettered access to the larger American market, many of those ships will sail to ports in Oregon or Washington (or perhaps Canada or Mexico). Most of California’s imports are going to dry up about the same time the ink on their declaration of secession does. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2016, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467/420 "2016-11-22T23:59:07Z")
BTW, it looks like a majority of Californians oppose this plan. Get that? It’s too wacky an idea even for California. > **[Most Californians Not Backing #Calexit, Poll Finds](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/calexit-california-secession-kpix-5-surveyusa-poll/)** > > While some Californians upset of Donald Trump's election are desiring to secede from the United States, a KPIX 5 / SurveyUSA poll finds most people are dubious of the idea. > [@](#): > > The poll of 800 California voters taken last week found only 23 percent of those surveyed backing the idea of California becoming its own country. A majority, 57 percent, are opposed, while another 20 percent are not sure about secession. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-joined-and-pledged-support-to-yes-california-today/771467.md?page=22)