I understand that the movement was started by someone who is sponsored by Russia and that Nigel Farage is currently involved in fundraising for Calexit. Does this change anyone’s opinion of the idea of California leaving?
Snopes article on Russian and Kremlin ties
One of several articles on Nigel Farage and Calexit
Apologies if the thread has already covered this. It’s a long thread.
I’m not in favor of secession. But if there’s any one argument that could get me to change my mind, this would likely be it.
Minorities in California are going to be hurt by the Trump administration. I do not (at this time) think that level of harm is going to be sufficiently high to justify leaving the country. But minorities in California have an absolute right to protect themselves. Non-minorities in California are justifiable in being more concerned about harm happening to the minority members among their friends and family, then they are about harms happening to minority members on the other side of the country. To suggest that we have a moral duty to stay and fight for the rights of minorities in Alabama, regardless of what the cost to ourselves, is ethically dubious at best. To suggest that we bear some moral culpability for what happens to minority members who couldn’t get out is monstrous. There is no difference, in my view, between that, and telling a Syrian refugee that they’re responsible for what happens to people still in Syria, because they didn’t stay to help.
I dunno - this just seems like more nationalism on a smaller stage. I mean, I care more about friends and family than I do about strangers as well. I assume everyone does - it is only natural. But I don’t have any more or less concern for a random stranger in Red Bluff than I do for one in Mobile. “Californian” for me is an easy geographic descriptor that otherwise has no particular emotional resonance. Then again I wasn’t born here, I lived in a half dozen different states when I was young and given rising costs there is an outside possibility I may not die here.
I think it is ethically arguable, but I also think it is a valid POV. ETA: I mean it is arguable whether Alabamans are also “ourselves”.
I think that analogy is too harsh. One involves walking away from a reasonably civil political fight, the other walking away from a nightmarish shithole that was a brutal dictatorship even long before it became a civil war hell-on-earth.
I agree, a random stranger down the street is no more or less significant to me than a random stranger in Delaware. If everyone being damaged by the Republican control of this country were equally unknown to me, there’s no reason for to support secession - it’s just a slightly differently defined group of strangers that’s being hurt. It is a different equation when it’s someone you care about - or your own self - who’s being hurt by the Republican administration. Which is why said “friends and family members,” when I was talking about why non-minority Californians might justifiably support secession, and not “geographically adjacent strangers.”
You’re missing the analogy. It’s not, “In what ways is Trump America like Syria?” It’s, “In what situation is it okay to judge someone from escaping a bad situation for a better situation?” “There are still other people in that bad situation,” is not, in my opinion, sufficient reason to judge someone for that, whether the “bad situation” they want to escape is a revocation of marriage rights, or a danger of cluster bombs. No one is required to stay and suffer a particular injury or indignity, just because someone else does not have the opportunity to escape.
You cannot make martyrdom mandatory. Even for very small values of “martyrdom.”
If by “martyrdom” you mean California continuing as a part of the United States, I think this whole thread has established that yes, indeed, we can make it mandatory, and we very likely will.
I don’t.
Ah, gotcha. It’s not that you care about Californians more than Alabamans in the abstract, it is just that you and yours are purely coincidentally currently Californian. So secession might be hypothetically to your ( or others in your situation ) advantage in terms of social policy, even if you disagree with it for other reasons.
No, I got it. I just think the difference in scale warps it beyond usefulness. Well, for me anyway.
Oddly enough, I mostly agree with you. I just don’t think iiandyiiii’s point is worthless or should be summarily dismissed. There would a huge cost to the United States as a whole to a California secession and it goes well beyond just more expensive almonds. There would be a social and psychological cost as well. I have some very liberal friends in the heart of a very Republican part of Missouri who can’t easily uproot themelves - they count on their friends in California to help balance out the national (in)sanity ;).
Maybe it isn’t the most significant argument for not seceeding, but it is a reasonable one to consider IMO.
I get it about friends and family, but there’s another important reason that proximate strangers are different from strangers far away that’s been left unstated here. Those who are in some sense “nearby” tend to be associated into communities that are more able to exercise powers of self-determination, whether it’s neighbors on the same street pushing for some traffic ordinance or people in a state being able to exercise rational governance while the rest of the country goes to shit. Not that I think California secession is either remotely plausible or even necessarily desirable, but if there’s one persuasive reason for it, it’s that one.
Yes, exactly. It’s certainly not that I don’t care about the plight of gay Mississippians. I also care about the plight of gay Russians - but I’m not obligated to move to Moscow to help them out. If it shakes out that it’s better for my own rights and safety to no longer be an American, then that’s my choice to make.
At least, to the extent that I can find some place other than America that will take me. If my entire state decided to exit with me, that’s at least one problem solved.
It’s not so much that I found his post worthless, so much as fundamentally insulting. Shit’s going to get bad for people in this country who aren’t white, straight, and male. Maybe real bad. Being lectured by a white, straight, male that I have a responsibility to subject myself to that, because not everyone can get out is both an appalling display of victim blaming, and as clear a demonstration of the concept of privilege as one could ask for.
Perhaps your friends in Missouri should fix their own shit. It’s not California’s job to be a liberal anchor for the rest of Idiot America. I don’t want to be anyone’s hero, or their example of hope, or their shining city on a hill. I want to live my life without being fucked over by bigots and troglodytes. I’m reasonably certain that I can achieve that while staying an American citizen. But if someone else has made a different calculus, it’s not iiandyiiii’s place to shame them into toeing the line.
Ugh. That was dickish. Sorry, I’d been reading about the governor in NC rolling over on the gay rights bill, and lost my temper.
I actually thought it was quite eloquent!
That’s the part with all the legal brothels, right?
Clever, aren’t you?
Actually, no. Prostitution is illegal in the county Las Vegas resides in.
How is this thread still going? California is not exiting the Union. Not only do Californians not want that, but the rest of the US wouldn’t let it happen. Endlessly discussing something that’s never going to happen is pure fantasy.
And no, I’m not just thread-dumping. The point is that, at the time the thread started, feelings were raw, and it was understandable that people reacted by seeking some alternate reality that could be achieved. But it’s now time to admit that it’s just a reaction to the result of the day, and pick up the toys and come inside for the night.
So in 10 years when California has fallen apart from all the new regulations they’re able to pass without the rest of us weighing them down, will the rest of the country be expected to just take you’ll back?
The liberals and progressives in flyover country get plenty of shit to eat already and don’t need or deserve your contempt
I believe the vote isn’t scheduled until 2019. Only two more years to go. The suspense is killing me. 
Heh, that’s the clever bit. Living most of my life in the Second Province of Brigham has taught me that (dare I say it?) most Mormons are not really all that devout or dedicated to the teachings of the church. The strength of the church lies in their social programs and networking. If the split to go that way that the brothels would be heavily taxed but not closed. The church tolerates sin when it must and makes as much money from it as it can when it can. Which is why it is clever. Another income stream, albeit indirectly, for the church.
Oops, too late.
Apparently the movement has been closed and the leader has left the country. I don’t know what has happened to the money.
Technically he’s been out of the country for a long time. Getting rid of the Bannon-esque former fringe right, now fringe left, leader living in Russia probably helps any new, improved, and renamed movement that springs up to replace it.