California secession?

@SummyF,

Wow, what an odd question. Still, I'm intrigued: Why would they? Why should they?

What tweeks me about your question, SummyF, is that I've often - quite in jest I might add - suggested we should take one very large saw and cut along the borders of CA and OR, NV and AZ. Then, with one big heave, push CA off into the pacific ocean to fend for themselves.

Obviously, I'm kidding. But my ownis for this has been - what I perceive to be - the etremely odd fashion in which CA seems to govern itself. My ex-wife even gets a chuckle out of the situation (she lives there).

So yea, back to some clarification: Why would considering such a thing be good? Assuming, of course, they're able to find someone to lend them money to keep operating Smile

Thanks for posting.

1 Reply

@Khethil,

I think the basic argument for that would be the fact that california is the 7th largest economy, is also one of the larger progressive voices (legally and socially of the us) and the federal government stops California from doing the things it wants to do.

Also the US bank ( located in l.a. {L.A. tallest building}) is one of the more successful banks during this economics crisis.

and if california did something like this Oregon would probably follow

also most of the american agriculture comes from the san quinine valley

the only issue would be military and government
im sure it would follow a western european style government, maybe similar to the germany model

and if the north american union became reality california wouldnt realy need military just a system of governance

1 Reply

@SummyF,

So... no real reason other than Pride in the state's "standing" or "accomplishments"?

Not much of a reason, imho; else 49 other states would have left a long time ago. Perhaps might it be that, "... we could do better on our own?" or "... we're so unique that its fit we determine our own destiny?". Such would seem to be the case, if indeed intense pride lies at the root of the idea.

Consolidation of territories into larger gatherings of greater diversity seems to me the productive way to go (in the interest of the homo sapien species). But as I'd suspect, we all have our opinions in the matter and rarely is there widespread concensus.

0 Replies

@SummyF,

SummyF;26783 wrote:

I am a 2nd generation californian and proud(i go to school in baltimore though)

what do you guys think? am i just a young crazy guy

or would this be something we should strive for?

YES!!! What have we got to do with all the inbred beet farmers? They hate and fear us. They are backward and their government is impossibly corrupt and bears too much influence on us. They need us, we do not need them!
Seceed! Seceed! Seceed!!!
And good riddance! All the Bushes Chaneys and McCains and all their pathological greed and control can go to hell!
We can get our own kings and live in peace and abundance for all residents/subjects! There certainly are sufficient resources for all to live comfortably, housed, fed, cared for medically, educated properly, etc...
Right on! Vote me for governor and my entire order of business (after my coronation) is to seceed from Amerikkka! and then redistribute the wealth that all residents can live comfortably and hence peacefully (within reason) as possible!

1 Reply

@nameless,

All Hail King Arnold!

1 Reply

@Khethil,

You can't secede. Sure, the Constitution says you can, but the US went through a particularly nasty war that set a new precedent.

1 Reply

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;26879 wrote:

You can't secede. Sure, the Constitution says you can, but the US went through a particularly nasty war that set a new precedent.

Dude, the USA neeeeds us! In so many ways!
What are they gonna do, invade us? Nuke us? Shoot us all? Cluster bomb silicon valley? Napalm our plantations? They will beg for trade rights and the right to defend our coast to protect their interests! We have them by the short hairs! How about imposing a tariff on all exports (to Amerikkka)? It could be done...

1 Reply

@nameless,

And California needs the US. California needs the rest of the nation's markets, otherwise California goes bust in a hurry.

Hey, I'm all for secession, so long as the movement is non-violent. A bit of a libertarian sympathy, but I really do prefer smaller nation states. Local government. Large nations have vast resources which are almost always squandered in military ventures.

1 Reply

@Didymos Thomas,

Didymos Thomas;26887 wrote:

And California needs the US. California needs the rest of the nation's markets, otherwise California goes bust in a hurry.

Nonsense! We are a garden of eden! We are wealthy in resources. Enough wealth to share all around. How can a gold mine still rich in ore go bust? Nonsense! We can, as I said, have 'trade agreements' with the USA, but they would have to be carefully watched! They are not to be trusted!

Quote:

Hey, I'm all for secession, so long as the movement is non-violent.

I can appreciate your morality.

Quote:

A bit of a libertarian sympathy, but I really do prefer smaller nation states. Local government.

The kings are sympathetic to 'local rule', but there must be lines drawn that can only be crossed under dire penalty. Other than that, the subjects are welcome to work out their own particulars; what color to paint the courthouse...

Quote:

Large nations have vast resources which are almost always squandered in military ventures.

Not the Kingdoms of California! We are peaceful and generous, unless attacked or threatened.
And for our trade and position, I'm sure that the USA (and Mexico) will protect our borders from invasion, etc...
All the logistics can be worked out.
Rome wasn't built from rolling stones and moss! *__-

2 Replies

@SummyF,

New here so have a couple of questions. The only dumb question is the one you dont ask or so i have heard. Ok how much money does California give the federal government in taxes each year? Isnt the power the feds have over the military unconstitutional? All government is repressive just some more than others. Doesnt our fed gov have the same powers as a dictator if they see fit to use them? I am sure after I get the answers to these questions I will have more. Thanx

Freebird

Yeah Non Violent Secession LOL

1 Reply

@Freebird phil,

Quote:

Ok how much money does California give the federal government in taxes each year?

Given the size and wealth of California, I imagine the state is responsible for a great deal of the Federal government's income.

Quote:

Isnt the power the feds have over the military unconstitutional?

Not according to the Supreme Court.

Quote:

Doesnt our fed gov have the same powers as a dictator if they see fit to use them?

The Federal Government is a large entity, so I'm not sure you could liken the Federal Government to a dictator, regardless of the government's powers. Though, the government can give dictatorial powers to a single person if the necessarily legislation passes, or if the court makes certain decisions, ect.

0 Replies

@SummyF,

So does that mean the feds would fire upon its own people? What if Calif just didnt pay its taxes to the Feds?

Thanx for your reply to my questions.

0 Replies

@nameless,

Well, no offense to any Californians, but what makes you think the other states would allow succession? That has been tried and, sadly, failed. Considering the opinion that many have of california, I think people would take delight in the opportunity to occupy and impose their will on the state. I always love a suprise though, good luck!

0 Replies

@SummyF,

When was that argued in the supreme court about the military.
Again thanx for you help.

Freebird

1 Reply

@Freebird phil,

Quote:

So does that mean the feds would fire upon its own people? What if Calif just didnt pay its taxes to the Feds?

If by Feds you mean soldiers paid by the Federal government, such a thing has occurred - many times over and in modern times. Kent State, for example.

As for California and paying taxes: as far as I know, the vast majority of the tax revenues coming out of California to the Federal government come from individual citizens and companies in that state. Thus, giving that tax money to the Federal government is not a decision for the state government, but a decision that each individual and company would have to make. Generally, state governments collect money from the Federal government.

Quote:

When was that argued in the supreme court about the military.

The Supreme Court has heard many arguments regarding the military. As for the Federal government's right to raise and maintain a standing army, I do not think the court has needed to stand up for this capability. According to the Constitution, the Federal government can maintain a military. Under the Articles the Federal government lacked this authority.

0 Replies

@SummyF,

Thanx for the answers to my questions. So where does that leave us. I guess i just have frustrations because of the coming election and all the promises about change. Is there going to be any real change no matter who wins the election? Dont see the war ending anytime soon,our oil addiction isnt going to change, we are still going to have our troops all over the world to quote promote democracy. But isnt it our fault the feds have all this power? As I understand the Civil War, slavery was wrong and horrible, but the South did have some legitimate arguements about the power of the Federal Government. I am not for Civil War and dont think there are any easy answers. Just keep asking questions and trying to be helpful to the next person who comes my way.

Peace

Freebird

0 Replies

@nameless,

To clarify my beliefs of secession, i really don't mind if they do or don't. It's not my matter or my care. So go ahead!

But, be reasonable, could you?

1. California has a massive debt and deficit which could be hinderence at California's secession.

2. Even though i hate and think it is essentially unconstitutional for many reasons, the U.S. supreme court has declared it "unconstitutional".

3. Could the Republic be able to handle the problems that the federal government already has stolen from it and been granted?

4. Could the Republic be able to last without the commerce that is supposedly free?

5. How would it handle the "de-integration" from the Union without getting the U.S. angry?

0 Replies

@SummyF,

Although the Federal constitution was a little ambiguous about the right of states to succeed from the union-
Thomas Jefferson thought they could for instance
The Civil War settled the issue. Succession from the union is not legally allowed. And as for the willingness of the federal government to use force to preserve the union, I think we have the answer to that one already too.

1 Reply

@prothero,

prothero;164488 wrote:

Although the Federal constitution was a little ambiguous about the right of states to succeed from the union-
Thomas Jefferson thought they could for instance
The Civil War settled the issue. Succession from the union is not legally allowed. And as for the willingness of the federal government to use force to preserve the union, I think we have the answer to that one already too.

Well, it's not ambiguous, but completely avoids the question, more or less. From what i know, a union is an assiociation of people with a common goal which honestly if interpretted more it can be scryed out that a member could leave if the common goal was gone. Another is the Tenth Amendment; this could give the right to secede. Many groups of States have thought about seceding like New England (hate for everyone else), and North Carolina and Virginia. Those two disliked the New Constitution and knew that the new Union would collapse because of being split in half.

The sad outcome of misguided goals destroyed the power to leave this Union and created the absorbtion of power by the federal government. [HTML][/HTML]

0 Replies

California secession?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know