So why not secede?

[Anti Federalist]

[Matt Collins]

they don't just let you leave peacefully... besides, the country isn't divided on geographic lines as much as it used to be, it is non urban vs non-urban. Suburbs are the battleground.

[Anti Federalist]

they don't just let you leave peacefully... besides, the country isn't divided on geographic lines as much as it used to be, it is non urban vs non-urban. Suburbs are the battleground.

That website, as I'm sure all the rest, are filled with posts looking to exterminate me, and you, personally.

I don't even care anymore...open fire $#@!s.

Enough talk in a bag.

[TheTexan]

they don't just let you leave peacefully... besides, the country isn't divided on geographic lines as much as it used to be, it is non urban vs non-urban. Suburbs are the battleground.

Say what you want about urban/rural or whatever, Texas as a whole is a very different place than California as a whole.

The lines are clear enough for me, and they are only getting clearer as the left becomes more and more extreme.

And whether they "let" us leave peacefully or not, I don't give a damn, there's more of us than there are of them.

[TheTexan]

There's only 3 ways this ends:

1) We secede peacefully while we still have time
2) We civil war these $#@!s while we still have time
3) Each and everyone on this forum will be lined up against a wall and shot (except me, I'll be sipping mojitos on an undisclosed island somewhere)

[Matt Collins]

Say what you want about urban/rural or whatever, Texas as a whole is a very different place than California as a whole.

You must not have ever traveled the I-35 corridor

[TheTexan]

You must not have ever traveled the I-35 corridor

Wrong again. Ive lived most of my life along that corridor.

[Anti Globalist]

Why do I get the feeling that all of these leftists calling for civil war are the type of people that wouldn't last two seconds on the battlefield?

[Anti Federalist]

Why do I get the feeling that all of these leftists calling for civil war are the type of people that wouldn't last two seconds on the battlefield?

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/michaelmalice/st...87587962380291

//

[Occam's Banana]

So why not secede?

https://twitter.com/duty2warn/status...58123056885760


https://twitter.com/duty2warn

[Swordsmyth]

This is their last chance to secede.
But they will not take it or let us take it, they are devoted to imposing their will on us.
When we win we must expel the survivors.

[TheTexan]

This is their last chance to secede.
But they will not take it or let us take it, they are devoted to imposing their will on us.
When we win we must expel the survivors.

Expelling them directly probably would not be politically viable. Perhaps we can give them a gentle nudge by passing legislation that makes their life miserable. If that doesn't work we can start building work camps and furnaces and hope they "get the hint"

[Matt Collins]

Expelling them directly probably would not be politically viable. Perhaps we can give them a gentle nudge by passing legislation that makes their life miserable. If that doesn't work we can start building work camps and furnaces and hope they "get the hint"

Advocating what the Nazis did is really not cool.

[Matt Collins]

Why do I get the feeling that all of these leftists calling for civil war are the type of people that wouldn't last two seconds on the battlefield?

It won't be them people will be fighting, it will be the government. Who do you think enforces all of these draconian anti-freedom "progressive" agenda laws?

[oyarde]

Why do I get the feeling that all of these leftists calling for civil war are the type of people that wouldn't last two seconds on the battlefield?

I dont think they plan on doing it . My guess is they want the alphabet agencies to do it for them.

[Anti Federalist]

I dont think they plan on doing it . My guess is they want the alphabet agencies to do it for them.

They already are.

The J6 are, for all intents and purposes, political prisoners.

[TheTexan]

It won't be them people will be fighting, it will be the government. Who do you think enforces all of these draconian anti-freedom "progressive" agenda laws?

People fight wars, not governments. Abstract concepts are not capable of firing weapons.

[69360]

they don't just let you leave peacefully... besides, the country isn't divided on geographic lines as much as it used to be, it is non urban vs non-urban. Suburbs are the battleground.

Yeah it really doesn't work without massive population movement

[TheTexan]

Yeah it really doesn't work without massive population movement

Secession leads to exactly that kind of population movement.

If we wait for the lines to be crystal clear, there will never be lines.

Lines only exist when they are drawn in the sand.

Then, people will choose, one side, or the other.

[TheTexan]

Even if the population in America was truly homogenous [it isnt], secession would still be a huge leap forward in terms of limited government and liberty.

I can understand people on this board who are against secession because they don't think it's worth the war, but I don't understand at all the people on this board who still would not choose to secede if it could be done peacefully. Makes zero sense to me.

[Matt Collins]

I can understand people on this board who are against secession because they don't think it's worth the war, but I don't understand at all the people on this board who still would not choose to secede if it could be done peacefully. Makes zero sense to me.

There is no indication it can be done successfully, much less peacefully.

As for me I am ok with staying if the federal government was under control as the Constitution prescribes. End fiat money, go back to legislatures electing US Senators, and abolish the income tax, commerce clause abuse, etc. But since none of those things are likely to happen, I'm ok leaving if there is a chance of success. But there are sadly no options in front of us at present.

As I've reasoned for a number of years, I think the federal government may either collapse or become impotent due to a currency crisis and that could be the thing that allows the US to regionalize / balkanize. Again though, the enemy isn't just in DC or "up north" or "in California" anymore... it is in the next largest urban area.

[Occam's Banana]

There is no indication it can be done successfully [...]

The secession of the American colonies from the United Kingdom of Great Britain was successful.

That is an indication it can be done.

[...] much less peacefully.

The secession of the Baltic states, Russia, et al. from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was both successful and remarkably peaceful. What relatively little violence did occur was much more a product of chaos and confusion than of any concerted effort by the Soviet state to forcibly prevent secession. If you had asked anyone even just a dozen years prior to those events whether such a thing was likely - or even merely possible - the answer would almost universally have been, "No! Of course not! There is no indication it can be done." And yet, it happened.

That is an indication it can be done.

I think the federal government may either collapse or become impotent due to a currency crisis and that could be the thing that allows the US to regionalize / balkanize.

This contradicts your assertion that there is no indication it can be done. If it is the case (as you say you believe) that "collapse" or "impotence" (for whatever reason, such as a currency crisis) might lead to separation, then that is, by your own admission, an indication it could happen (i.e., that it can be done). In the scenario you suggest, "collapse" and "impotence" would just be latter-day equivalents of Lexington and Concord ("the shot currency crisis heard 'round the world", so to speak).

However, the events at Lexington and Concord did not cause America to separate from Britain. They were the catalyst for separation, but not the cause of it. Separationism had been brewing in the colonies well before those fateful events. The American colonists did not just wake up one day and suddenly decide to kick the British out.

Likewise, "collapse" or "impotence" would not cause the regionalization or balkanization of the United States, but either or both might serve as the catalyst for it. But in the case of that eventuality, secessionism will have been brewing since before the separation itself actually occurred. The idea of "national divorce" (and even the dreaded "s-word") is already percolating out of the fringes of American political discourse and gradually seeping into the mainstream, even if it is only for the mainstream to dismiss it - but just a decade ago, that same mainstream wouldn't have dignified the idea by acknowledging that it even existed. Now, though, hey are finding it needful to expend effort and resources to denounce the idea as more and more people across the political spectrum are starting to wonder if it is really such a terrible idea after all (see post #11 above for just one quite recent example of this)

The time is not yet ripe for outright secession - but it is ripening. Whether it ends up yielding any viable fruit remains to seen, as is the manner (peaceful or violent) in which that fruit might be harvested. Whatever one might think of the issue, to say at this point that there is "no indication" that it can happen is just tone-deaf.

Again though, the enemy isn't just in DC or "up north" or "in California" anymore... it is in the next largest urban area.

https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/st...50051050033154

[Bryan]

There is no indication it can be done successfully, much less peacefully.

In the 1950's there were 102 "widely recognized sovereign states" (per wikipedia), that's now up to 195. Certainly not a direct indication since none came from the USA but it's still something.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_in_the_1950s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_in_the_2020s

[Swordsmyth]

Expelling them directly probably would not be politically viable. Perhaps we can give them a gentle nudge by passing legislation that makes their life miserable. If that doesn't work we can start building work camps and furnaces and hope they "get the hint"

It will be perfectly viable after they start a civil war and lose.
The trick will be to keep people from just exterminating all of them.

[Matt Collins]

The secession of the American colonies from the United Kingdom of Great Britain was successful.

That is an indication it can be done.

You can't see the absolute fundamental differences between a modern secession effort and the secession of a government thousands of miles away?

Apples and oranges. Besides, it has already been tried under more favorable geographic conditions than exist now (1860s) and it didn't work then. Geography has only gotten worse because the enemy are imbedded in urban areas in every state. Even places like Idaho and Montana are full of progressives despite being mostly rural.

The secession of the Baltic states, Russia, et al. from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was both successful and remarkably peaceful.

Because the overriding government collapsed. Not because they fought their way out. Which is what I stated above, for this to happen the US government would have to essentially become impotent.

Again, Soviet satellite states and their independence is no comparison to the US states.

This contradicts your assertion that there is no indication it can be done. If it is the case (as you say you believe) that "collapse" or "impotence" (for whatever reason, such as a currency crisis) might lead to separation, then that is, by your own admission, an indication it could happen (i.e., that it can be done). In the scenario you suggest, "collapse" and "impotence" would just be latter-day equivalents of Lexington and Concord ("the shot currency crisis heard 'round the world", so to speak).

Not at all, you're confusing what I wrote.

There is no indication that Americans could fight their way out of the current US federal system, especially while the federal government is operational. Geography alone makes that highly unlikely.

The idea of "national divorce" (and even the dreaded "s-word") is already percolating out of the fringes of American political discourse and gradually seeping into the mainstream, even if it is only for the mainstream to dismiss it - but just a decade ago, that same mainstream wouldn't have dignified the idea by acknowledging that it even existed.

About 12 years ago it was being discussed, but again, not seriously. And likewise now. There is no meaningful way to pull it off.

You need to look at a red vs blue map to better understand the political reality we currently live in:




Don't get me wrong, I would prefer for the US federal government to shape up and start obeying the Constitution again. But with an unlimited printing press and national election of US Senators and a case-law method of court jurisprudence that too is also highly unlikely to happen. In lieu of that I would like to see peaceful secession, ideally by region, but again, looking at the map in the video above, I understand that is probably not going to happen either.

[TheTexan]

The UK seceded from the EU. Not a single drop of blood.

[TheTexan]

About 12 years ago it was being discussed, but again, not seriously. And likewise now. There is no meaningful way to pull it off.

Normalcy bias.

The Texas GOP adding a referendum vote to the platform is a big step toward secession. No, we aren't yet close, but we are a lot closer than we were 12 years ago.

And you obsess too much about the divide being rural/urban. The simple fact of the matter is - it doesn't matter. For several reasons:

1) Secession is a good thing, always. Regardless of the divide or lack thereof
2) Texas as a whole is very different from California as a whole (you disagree, but you are also wrong.)
3) Secession by its very nature will necessarily take whatever tiny divide that does exist, and magnify it over time.

[TheTexan]

There is no indication that Americans could fight their way out of the current US federal system, especially while the federal government is operational. Geography alone makes that highly unlikely.

The "federal government" seems all powerful when you look at the United States as a whole, but when you remove Texas, Florida, the mid-west, etc, from the "federal government", you know what? It's not that scary anymore.

Bring it on...

And btw do you know where the largest stockpile of US nukes is? That's right - Texas

Where is the US's only nuclear weapons assembly/disassembly plant? That's right - Texas

[Matt Collins]

The UK seceded from the EU. Not a single drop of blood.

Again, not even comparable to the situation in the US.