There doesn’t have to be anarchy. I’m in favor of the right to secede, but it would have to be a sober, careful, slow process. It would only be anarchy if you allowed any group to secede at any time on any whim.
Anyway, if enough people want to secede, then may you’re right - maybe it’s NOT a country. And why keep a non-real country going just for the heck of it? The Czechs and the Slovaks apparently didn’t really believe in Czechoslovakia and they’re doing okay now without it. Maybe the Flemish and the Walloons would be happier going the same route.
I totally hate spell checker when it ‘helps’ me by deciding I really meant ‘succession’ instead of ‘secession’ in a thread with ‘secession’ in the thread title. :smack:
I think a war is fairly likely under circumstances like these. It would start as what amounts to a civil war within the state - those who want to secede vs those who don’t. The US government would ultimately intercede, if necessary in favor of the latter group.
Counties and towns have no inherent authority. Local governments are created by their respective state governments, and can be overruled or abolished by the whims thereof. State governments, however, were not created by the federal government. Quite the contrary: the federal government was itself created by a voluntary union of preëxisting state governments. So it’s far easier to make a legal case for a state secession.
All you people talking of secession are ignoring the real world of … economics.
Most of the suggested seceding states would promptly go bankrupt – they are mostly ‘welfare states’ – they get much more in Federal money than they pay in taxes.
If the old slave states left, the rest of the USA would get an immediate economic bump, because we wouldn’t have to support the South any longer. Within a couple of years, Texas would be talking about seceding from the New Confederacy because they are the only viable economy, and they would be tired of supporting the rest of them. [If it wasn’t for the moral evil of slavery, we would have been much better off just letting them go.]
IF Hawaii left, they would take a big hit economically from the loss of all the US military (unless they rented them back to the USA), the decreased tourism from other parts of the USA, increased import duties on their remaining pineapple/sugar crops, and the loss of Federal aid. They’d be in a Depression real soon.
The west coast (California, Oregon, Washington) is the one that probably could make it as a separate nation. They have a large & varied economy, and don’t depend much on Federal money – they pay in more taxes than they get back. They’d probably do pretty well. (Of course, if they really piss us off, we could just dam up the Colorado river and cut off their water, and watch them turn back into a desert.)
So I guess you don’t mind the fact that a handful of arrogant oligarchs behaved like spoiled brats after losing a free and fair election to establish a state whose primary purpose was to preserve, perpetuate, and expand the institution of human slavery.
That might apply to the original 13 colonies, but not any of the subsequent states. They didn’t found the club - they were permitted to join it. Besides, the vast majority of the state were founded by the federal government in the first place. After all, it was the federal government that made the Louisiana Purchase and conquered the northern section of Mexico. Why shouldn’t it be the rightful owner of all that territory?
The position of the 13 colonies to Britain is not particularly comparable to the position of any state to Washington. There is no serious secessionist movement in the US, which preceded most secessions and break-ups of countries in history.
This. If today’s South wants to go, let it go (though you’re not taking fucking Florida!) Mass self-determination is as it should be. The South of yesteryear was taking millions of slaves with it; they sure as hell didn’t get a vote.
They are multi-role aircraft. They can carry a substantial bomb load, but most are not equipped with the gear to deliver smart bombs. On the plus side, dropping dumb bombs on the Governor’s Mansion seems fitting, if redundant.
If any red state(s) got serious about secession, I’d move there and advocate for it. I doubt the US.gov would go to war to stop it if it were supported by a majority of the population, but if they did, I’d fight back.
I’m reasonably sure there are far more people who couldn’t afford to drop everything and flee, particuarly home owners who wouldn’t want to abandon their homes. And in the big cities there are likely people who can’t even afford a car.
At a guess, they would be more likely to think it could all be resolved peacefully, and decide to wait it out.
I don’t see any states that are even remotely serious about secession, so what we’re talking about is fantasyland. Sort of like if I said, “if our next president turns out to be an illegal alien and refuses to step down when impeached and removed from office, I’d fight him too”. Never going to happen.
ETA: I am a bit curious though, do Canada or the UK have treason laws? And do you think the Scots or Quebecians(?) that supported secession were treasonous?
