It would be better to just break California up into multiple states with the federal government purpose to provide military defense and immigration control. We all could be somewhat independent except on immigration.
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
What difference does it make when the real Mexico is already right there?Originally Posted by kahless
Perhaps the federal government should invade Mexico, annex them and cleanse them of their substandard culture so that they aren't an imminent threat to 'Murican culture.
Mexico is not the world's 6th largest economy like California. They lack the tech industry and military industrial complex of California. They are a third world country.
You really need to get over this fixation you have with seeing everything as racism and think long term by looking at the big picture.
* See my visitor message area for caveats related to my posting history here.
* Also, I have effectively retired from all social media including posting here and are basically opting out of anything to do with national politics or this country on federal or state level and rather focusing locally. I may stop by from time to time to discuss philosophy on a general level related to Libertarian schools of thought and application in the real world.
Mexico should have been annexed when it was conquered in the 1800's . Too late now.
Do something Danke
So, you're worried about California becoming a military power and invading the western U.S.? But by importing all of those Chinese and Mexicans, won't they be impoverishing themselves? Becoming a third world country like you claim immigrants are doing to the U.S.? And if they become a third world country, they are no longer a threat, like Mexico?
I thought you folks were trying to get rid of the Mexicans because they vote Democrat. Yet when presented with the option to get rid of 55 Democratic electoral votes and dozens of Democrat representatives, you don't like it?
Where did I say California will become a third world country? I did not and regardless believe they would still be an economic and military power. I would not risk turning the entire state like that over to fascists to eventually become a threat to the rest of the US. This is why I said a few posts back it would be less of a threat to rather break California up into multiple states with the federal government controlling immigration and military defense.
It is more complex issue than you make it out to be. This whole fixation on racism you have clouds your judgement.
An independent California wouldn't be military power. Those wussy liberals that want to leave the US because Trump hurts their feelings would never serve in a military. They also would probably outlaw gun ownership. Anyone who would potentially serve in a military or currently serving in the US military would leave the state before secession.
My fixation isn't on race. It's on trying to figure out the mental gymnastics you have to go through to justify forcing these people to remain in a union that they may not want to be a part of. And to try to show the ridiculousness of opposing this, yet claiming to favor personal liberty.
An independent California would immediately join NATO and have the U.S. protect them anyway. They wouldn't be invading anyone, except probably Middle Eastern countries.
Last edited by The Gold Standard; 11-22-2016 at 11:47 AM.
If they were allowed to break off with their existing military assets, unlikely, they are already a military power.
That propaganda you speak of, the wussies at least are a fringe element used to serve a political agenda. The rest have proven to be more violent that Conservatives. You forget that these are the same people that believe in national service and serving the state which is their ultimate agenda.
Whoa, hold on there TGS...I like it just fine.
kahless is an outlier.
Of course, I'm being tongue in cheek here, but seriously, this should be encouraged.
This country is too big, too divided, too ungovernable without a heavy handed police state.
Time for everybody to go their own way.
This is the real world where clutching to textbook definition of libertarian ideology is a pipe dream. It could work with some real world modifications to protect ourselves.
Like I said breaking CA into many pieces in a national union presents less of threat to others and provides greater liberty.
An outlier to some posting here but closer to the beliefs of the Pauls in a Ron Paul Forum. I am for greater individual liberty for people by breaking CA into smaller pieces as opposed to those who want it to leave in one piece to become a threat to the rest of us.
Yes. Maintaining the strong, central government is the key. Works much better than these libertarian pipe dreams.
And what does that mean?Pishevar said the movement of states to regain power from the federal government was part of, "A new Federalism where state & local govts are empowered to determine their destinies while bonded together in a United States of America."
LOL - Let me guess, kahless, you live in California, amirite?
I know. He's just showing his true colors. Preserve the union at all costs.
Paul: Secession 'deeply American'
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/1...inciple-084058
By Kevin Cirilli
11/19/12 04:43 PM EST
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Monday that secession was a “deeply American principle,” amid a growing number of people petitioning the White House to let their states secede from the U.S.
“Secession is a deeply American principle. This country was born through secession. Some felt it was treasonous to secede from England, but those ‘traitors’ became our country’s greatest patriots,” the former presidential candidate wrote in a post on his House website. “There is nothing treasonous or unpatriotic about wanting a federal government that is more responsive to the people it represents.”
He continued: “If the possibility of secession is completely off the table there is nothing to stop the federal government from continuing to encroach on our liberties and no recourse for those who are sick and tired of it.”
You could be right, but I don't recall anything Ron Paul ever said that would lead me to believe he would favor forcing California to remain in the union if they wanted to leave.
I never said that. I have repeatedly already said a national union only for military defense and immigration. Allow the states and regions to secede and form their own solutions. It is you and others here promoting California secession as a whole therefore denying the counties and regions their own right to self determination.
Oh. Looks like you were wrong.
He's not.
See post 80.
Ron Paul fully endorses the idea of secession.
I'm not denying them anything. If there was a movement for counties breaking away from California, I would support that too. I am always in favor of secession, all the way down to the individual. California's status in the union has zero bearing on whether or not counties and regions could secede from California.
Yes, I see. I'm out of rep for you.
Well, get that Jefferson nation going up north.
Sorry if you're going to get dragged along with LA, San Fran and San Diego...but not that sorry.
#CalExit Now
no kidding lol
"state and local governments can determine their own destinies while being embounded by the FedGov"
lol
If you asked Ron Paul whether the counties or regions in CA should be allowed to secede or only California as a whole, what do you think he is going to say? This is why I said I am closer to beliefs he has preached over the years that the more local the better which got us to this point in the thread.
I think he would say GO!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us