🇺🇸 Discussion: Secession

[MessiahDecoy123]

52% of Trump supporters want red states to secede from the union and 41% of Biden voters agree.

So secession: could it happen, should it happen and how would it happen?

 

[InCali]

Legally it can't be done, but legally the US wasn't allowed to exist. I mentioned this somewhere else, but the states that want to secede basically are the ones that benefit most from being in the Union. By and large, they are the poorer states that get more support. Outside of New Mexico (I suspect they get a lot of money for military and research), the top 10 are all red states. Texas pays more than they get, but not by much. Basically, they'd be cutting their own throats. The bottom line is that I don't see how it could work logistically. Think about what interstate travel, for example, would look like.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Legally it can't be done, but legally the US wasn't allowed to exist. I mentioned this somewhere else, but the states that want to secede basically are the ones that benefit most from being in the Union. By and large, they are the poorer states that get more support. Outside of New Mexico (I suspect they get a lot of money for military and research), the top 10 are all red states. Texas pays more than they get, but not by much. Basically, they'd be cutting their own throats. The bottom line is that I don't see how it could work logistically. Think about what interstate travel, for example, would look like.

Yeah plus most states have at least 40% supporting the opposing party.

What happens to those people?

 

[InCali]

Yeah plus most states have at least 40% supporting the opposing party.

What happens to those people?

Move to a blue state where the money and technology is. I guess the most workable solution would be the Civil War model. Carve out the south where people would be mostly dirt poor, but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

"Cutting their own throats" is unfortunately the Neo-Confederates go to move these days, no?

And not just today.

These are of a kind with the folk that kept on sending their kids to whatever foreign meat grinder conflict we have going on. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... They refuse to see any issue until it is too late, and even then, I mean you STILL see some really confident people try to justify Vietnam, blame Dems and journalism for how that war went without a thought of how it wasn't possible to "win" and with no care for all the lives sacrificed for BS geopolitics bragging rights that benefits no one.

I still have low expectations for succession any time soon even if there are a lot of clearly incredibly dense people across the spectrum who think it is possible and probable and that it would be a good thing.


It won't ever be full on Civil War...

But we are headed for an extended period of civil unrest that will bubble to the surface from coast to coast from time to time, think Jan. 6th, think riots that spill over from legit protest, like summer of 2020, combined with terrorists attacks like bombings, mass shootings and targeted assassinations. The Oklahoma City Bombing type event will become more common.

This will be the "American Troubles" forced on us by a slice of the populous that will never be reasoned with.

The disease is in the system already. It isn't fatal but we are just gonna have to try and live with it as it works through our body politic the next couple of decades.

 

[Fosterson]

I mean you STILL see some really confident people try to justify Vietnam, blame Dems and journalism for how that war went

Actually, the Democratic Party has to shoulder a huge part of the blame for Vietnam. After all, it was under JFK and then especially LBJ that the small number of US "advisors" that had been sent to South Vietnam by Ike swelled to tens (and ultimately hundreds) of thousands of troops.

The GOP obviously didn't have clean hands either, though. Nixon and Kissinger shamefully sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks in October 1968 and thereby unnecessarily prolonged the war for several more years, and then expanded it with the illegal bombing of Cambodia, which devastated and destabilized that country to such an extent that it created the conditions for Pol Pot's genocidal Khmer Rouge to come to power.

without a thought of how it wasn't possible to "win" and with no care for all the lives sacrificed for BS geopolitics bragging rights that benefits no one.

Of course, the great irony with Vietnam is that the war was allegedly being waged to push back against Soviet and Chinese influence, when in reality the Soviets were at best ambivalent about Ho Chi Minh, and the Vietnamese communists were very suspicious of Mao, given the long history of bloody conflict between China and Vietnam (its for this reason why today Vietnam sees America as an ally against China).

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Actually, the Democratic Party has to shoulder a huge part of the blame for Vietnam. After all, it was under JFK and then especially LBJ that the small number of US "advisors" that had been sent to South Vietnam by Ike swelled to tens (and ultimately hundreds) of thousands of troops.

The GOP obviously didn't have clean hands either, though. Nixon and Kissinger shamefully sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks in October 1968 and thereby unnecessarily prolonged the war for several more years, and then expanded it with the illegal bombing of Cambodia, which devastated and destabilized that country to such an extent that it created the conditions for Pol Pot's genocidal Khmer Rouge to come to power.



Of course, the great irony with Vietnam is that the war was allegedly being waged to push back against Soviet and Chinese influence, when in reality the Soviets were at best ambivalent about Ho Chi Minh, and the Vietnamese communists were very suspicious of Mao, given the long history of bloody conflict between China and Vietnam (its for this reason why today Vietnam sees America as an ally against China).

You misunderstood my meaning.

Conservatives today still blame "Liberal Dems" "Hippies" ect. for the Vietnam War effort not being successful.

How many decades removed are we from those days? And yet they still believe it was both a righteous action as well as "solvable" that if we just stuck to our guns and kept pouring people and resources into South Asia we'd turn a corner...

Sound familiar?

Just as with Iraq and Afghanistan general Democratic Party resistance and eventual souring on military operations was not the reasons attempts to plant a Jeffersonian Democratic Republic where there was no fertile soil for it was unsuccessful. It was a fool's errand to begin with.

 

[Fosterson]

You misunderstood my meaning.

Conservatives today still blame "Liberal Dems" "Hippies" ect. for the Vietnam War effort not being successful.

Sure, there are some who argue that. I'm just disputing the notion that the Vietnam War was solely the fault of conservatives.

Just as with Iraq and Afghanistan general Democratic Party resistance and eventual souring on military operations was not the reasons attempts to plant a Jeffersonian Democratic Republic where there was no fertile soil for it was unsuccessful. It was a fool's errand to begin with.

Its worth remembering that both the Iraq and Afghan invasions had huge bipartisan support, so while obviously the Bush-Cheney crew have to take primary responsibility, large numbers of Dems happily went along with their agenda too. Not to mention that Obama actually INCREASED US troop numbers in Afghanistan with his 2009 "Surge".

And its worth remembering that the decision to pull out was made by Trump. Biden merely stuck to that agreement with the Taliban.

I honestly don't think there's any appetite left for so-called "nation-building" wars in either party now. The neoconservative ideologues who were the architects of Bush's "Freedom Agenda" have virtually no influence in the modern GOP (which has become increasingly insular and isolationist), and obviously Biden has explicitly come out against remaking the world in America's image.

Most US politicians now seem to view confronting China (and to a lesser extent Russia) as much more important foreign-policy goals than vague notions of spreading democracy.

 

[InCali]

Actually, the Democratic Party has to shoulder a huge part of the blame for Vietnam. After all, it was under JFK and then especially LBJ that the small number of US "advisors" that had been sent to South Vietnam by Ike swelled to tens (and ultimately hundreds) of thousands of troops.

The GOP obviously didn't have clean hands either, though. Nixon and Kissinger shamefully sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks in October 1968 and thereby unnecessarily prolonged the war for several more years, and then expanded it with the illegal bombing of Cambodia, which devastated and destabilized that country to such an extent that it created the conditions for Pol Pot's genocidal Khmer Rouge to come to power.



Of course, the great irony with Vietnam is that the war was allegedly being waged to push back against Soviet and Chinese influence, when in reality the Soviets were at best ambivalent about Ho Chi Minh, and the Vietnamese communists were very suspicious of Mao, given the long history of bloody conflict between China and Vietnam (its for this reason why today Vietnam sees America as an ally against China).

If we want to go back 60 years and then 60 years and then 60 years again and again and again.....

I suggest we focus on today and what each party represents rather than discussing Eisenhower, Teddy/Franklin Roosevelt, Lincoln and so on.

Lyndon Johnson was an asshat, but pushed a lot of important programs. I get that Vietnam was a cluster frell, but that has no more to do with the Dem party today than Abraham Lincoln; Vampire Hunter has to do with the Repubs. What happened back then has very little to do with the parties today.

I might have missed some context, but I've been watching football with my friend Sierra Nevada.

EDIT: Sierra Nevada here....

 

[Fosterson]

If we want to go back 60 years and then 60 years and then 60 years again and again and again.....

I suggest we focus on today and what each party represents rather than discussing Eisenhower, Teddy/Franklin Roosevelt, Lincoln and so on.

Lyndon Johnson was an asshat, but pushed a lot of important programs. I get that Vietnam was a cluster frell, but that has no more to do with the Dem party today than Abraham Lincoln; Vampire Hunter has to do with the Repubs.

I only discussed Vietnam because Krypton mentioned it.

 

[InCali]

I only discussed Vietnam because Krypton mentioned it.

He's always, ALWAYS causing trouble. My apologies.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Sure, there are some who argue that. I'm just disputing the notion that the Vietnam War was solely the fault of conservatives.



Its worth remembering that both the Iraq and Afghan invasions had huge bipartisan support, so while obviously the Bush-Cheney crew have to take primary responsibility, large numbers of Dems happily went along with their agenda too. Not to mention that Obama actually INCREASED US troop numbers in Afghanistan with his 2009 "Surge".

And its worth remembering that the decision to pull out was made by Trump. Biden merely stuck to that agreement with the Taliban.

I honestly don't think there's any appetite left for so-called "nation-building" wars in either party now. The neoconservative ideologues who were the architects of Bush's "Freedom Agenda" have virtually no influence in the modern GOP (which has become increasingly insular and isolationist), and obviously Biden has explicitly come out against remaking the world in America's image.

Most US politicians now seem to view confronting China (and to a lesser extent Russia) as much more important foreign-policy goals than vague notions of spreading democracy.

I wasn't debating whether "Conservatives" started anything though, but the evidence that Conservatives during that period absolutely drove the narrative that it was an essential move is in the record, the "C" word can easily be applied to a mess of the Democratic Party of the period as well.

It's why the Dixiecrat and Reagan Democrat titles exist to a large degree after all.

Conservatives/Evangelicals and a huge hypocritical faction of Libertarian types will still insist Vietnam was lost because of "The Left" undermining the efforts there.

Still.

Find me a rank and file Democrat or one elected to office that will do that in public in 2021.

This is the same mindset that makes dismissing 700,000 official deaths from a disease possible. It is what makes handwaving away an attempted coup the current popular pose among the masses of GQP types in charge of the Republican Party.

And it is the mindset that IS gonna result in domestic terrorism for a time in the continental U.S.A.

 

[chamber-music]

There seem to be people who hate the large diverse liberal areas but it is places like that generate much of the nations wealth and more marketable aspects of culture.

Move to a blue state where the money and technology is. I guess the most workable solution would be the Civil War model. Carve out the south where people would be mostly dirt poor, but it ain't gonna happen.

I honestly wonder what the hell they teach in history classes in some of these states.

The Antebellum South was awful for almost anyone who wasn't a white wealthy land baron. Less manufacturing, dependant on agriculture, dependent on export trade, anti-industrial, anti-urban, wealth distribution was much more unequal in the South than in the North, less social mobility, less education and less skilled labor.

Slavery aside, the Antebellum South SUCKED for most white people.
If they actually educated people on how the south was pre-civil war then I doubt they would think it was so great.

 

[Marvolo]

There seem to be people who hate the large diverse liberal areas but it is places like that generate much of the nations wealth and more marketable aspects of culture.


I honestly wonder what the hell they teach in history classes in some of these states.

The Antebellum South was awful for almost anyone who wasn't a white wealthy land baron. Less manufacturing, dependant on agriculture, dependent on export trade, anti-industrial, anti-urban, wealth distribution was much more unequal in the South than in the North, less social mobility, less education and less skilled labor.

Slavery aside, the Antebellum South SUCKED for most white people.
If they actually educated people on how the south was pre-civil war then I doubt they would think it was so great.

It depends what you want out of life. There is a lot of rural areas where I live. The fastest ambulance response time is an hour in some of these places. A lot of the people in those areas are happy to live in the boonies cut off from modern urban areas. They want to be left alone, and live off the land, and work a steady job. Then get old and pass on.

 

[InCali]

It depends what you want out of life. There is a lot of rural areas where I live. The fastest ambulance response time is an hour in some of these places. A lot of the people in those areas are happy to live in the boonies cut off from modern urban areas. They want to be left alone, and live off the land, and work a steady job. Then get old and pass on.

I can understand that. Not my cup of tea, but, hey, whatever. I don't like a totally hectic pace and like some quiet, alone time, but get bored not getting out at times. COVID taught me that. I can handle it better than most, but do like a change of pace; even if it's just going out for happy hour, lunch, a movie, etc. A vacation will be nice when I'm comfortable doing that.

 

[Zarex]

I say the blue states should secede and leave America to the 'Muricans. The west coast, northeast states and interested mid Atlantic states should join up with Canada and see how the states left behind fare in areas other than college football and oil exploration.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Trump supporters at Iowa rally see "civil war coming,' say he will 'save the world'

 

[Marvolo]

I'm more thankful than ever that our military stations troops from various states at bases. If some lunatic Red State governor or military officer tries to secede and take control of military bases in their state theyll have to deal with soldiers from other states that aren't traitors to America.

 

[Flint Marko]

"Cutting their own throats" is unfortunately the Neo-Confederates go to move these days, no?

And not just today.

These are of a kind with the folk that kept on sending their kids to whatever foreign meat grinder conflict we have going on. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... They refuse to see any issue until it is too late, and even then, I mean you STILL see some really confident people try to justify Vietnam, blame Dems and journalism for how that war went without a thought of how it wasn't possible to "win" and with no care for all the lives sacrificed for BS geopolitics bragging rights that benefits no one.

I still have low expectations for succession any time soon even if there are a lot of clearly incredibly dense people across the spectrum who think it is possible and probable and that it would be a good thing.


It won't ever be full on Civil War...

But we are headed for an extended period of civil unrest that will bubble to the surface from coast to coast from time to time, think Jan. 6th, think riots that spill over from legit protest, like summer of 2020, combined with terrorists attacks like bombings, mass shootings and targeted assassinations. The Oklahoma City Bombing type event will become more common.

This will be the "American Troubles" forced on us by a slice of the populous that will never be reasoned with.

The disease is in the system already. It isn't fatal but we are just gonna have to try and live with it as it works through our body politic the next couple of decades.

This is exactly what I was thinking after watching this clip.


Just dumb, incoherent anger aimed at all of us.

We will have pockets of intermittent violence incited by the dumbest people alive for at least the next couple of decades, all while the Republican political/media apparatus stokes the flames.

A year or two ago I started going through contemporary historical documents, newspapers, sermons, op-eds, etc. from the Vietnam era written by conservative Christians and was genuinely shocked even with the lowest of expectations. Unabashedly Pro-Vietnam and Pro-Nixon well past the bitter end.

Being on the wrong side of history has never concerned these people before and it isn't about to happen any time soon.

 

[chamber-music]

The United States breaking apart is a possibility some day. It's remarkable a large diverse country like America has managed to stay together for so long. Most large diverse territories tend to break up after some time. The Soviet Union didn't last that long. How long the U.S can survive being ever more polarized?

The misinformation, political polarization, social inequality and other such issues don't seem likely to be resolved anytime soon.

How large the amount of crazy fringe types exist is a question worth asking. I still think there are way more Americans opposed to the Capitol rioter types than those who agree with them.

It depends what you want out of life. There is a lot of rural areas where I live. The fastest ambulance response time is an hour in some of these places. A lot of the people in those areas are happy to live in the boonies cut off from modern urban areas. They want to be left alone, and live off the land, and work a steady job. Then get old and pass on.

That's fine. There are plenty of places like that all over the world with the same mindset and similar lifestyle. My only issue is with the hypocritical types who want the benefits of a society only when it's convenient for themselves.

 

[Herofan]

The economic impacts would be bad enough widely enough the rich wouldn't let it happen.

 

[DJ Kornphlake]

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Texas Tribune - Texas Republican Convention calls Biden win illegitimate and rebukes Cornyn over gun talks

The Independent - Texas Republicans want to secede from the United States. Could they do it?

Texas Tribune - No, Texas can’t legally secede from the U.S., despite popular myth (2021)

The Qonfederate RepubliQan party strikes again.

 

[DJ Kornphlake]

They don't really want to secede; it's just a distraction from all the other unpopular stuff they're doing.

 

[Marvolo]

Let's sell Texas to Mexico. It might boost our economy.