Secession

[redeye]

Bush isn't exactly bent on helping areas in crisis in the US - he was more or less the cause of the California energy crisis, and he's brushing off the problems that the recent blackout made evident.

If he continues to screw California and the East Coast, and if there doesn't seem to be any light at the end of the tunnel, should either of these areas secede? California as a whole is pretty self-sufficient in agriculture; has a GDP larger than this of any nation but the USA, Japan, Germany, and France; is one of the most ostracized states in the union; is much more liberal than the rest of the USA, even though east of Coast Range it's western Utah; and is being constantly given the finger by DC. The East Coast will have more problems with being an independent nation, having few if any natural resources and being far less self-sufficient, but it'll have the financial edge of the Megalopolis and Wall Street.

[demnan]

1. Hey, I know you use the term "DC" figurtively

But D.C. is one of the most Democratic areas in the country and also is underrepresented in comparison with the rest of the country. How about dividing D.C. like Berlin was divided? Half could be part of North/West U.S. and half could be part of South/Central U.S.

Hey, I'm just lazy and I don't want to have to move that far.

Seriously, I almost think it's coming to that point where we will have another Civil War. I agree with you.

[shockandawed]

2. Plain silly idea

First of all, talk of secession is only going to get us branded as traitors.

Secondly, you are proposing that each coast may seceed? Would they seceed as one?

Thirdly, this is the last thought one has before becoming an expatriot. Don't surrender this great country to a handful of greedy lunatics and the people too stupid to know better. Stand and fight.

Fourth, the nation's capital lies on the East Coast. You going to set up some sort of Berlin Wall around it? Or do you propose you take the capital with you?

And fifth, we would be abandoning 50% of the people in every other state.

Redirect your energy to something with more hope. If you want to do something positive, move to a swing state and get others you know to do so as well so as to assist the Democrats in retaking a house seat, or the presidency.

In a nutshell, this kind of post gives us a bad name.

[redeye]

3. A reply...

1. I am a traitor and damn proud of it.

2. No... the cultural divide is too big. There will prolly be 4 nations: California, Cascadia, the Megalopolis, and rural New England.

3. "Great" country? Besides, secession is one form of fighting.

4. I use the term "the East Coast" but really mean "everything from DC northward." DC will be problematic here; its culture is northeastern and it ideally belongs with Boston and the City, but it may well stay behind for political reasons.

5. Not at all. First, the divide is not only political but also cultural, and, for exampole, the Democrats in Utah are very conservative politically and mountain-state culturally. Second, the people who will be left behind already are, because the USA is mostly a collection of colonies of Texas; therefore, the only difference will be to the Californians and Northeasternes who'll be able to escape.

[ButterflyBlood]

6. what about the midwest?

eastern minnesota, eastern iowa, western wisconsin, eastern michigan, and chicago don't belong in the colonies of texas usa.

[arwalden]

8. A Bad Name? Why Did The Freeper-Types Think The...

...secession of Texas was such a fab idea? Funny how when it's THEIR idea, then it's a good idea. Oh the hypocrisy of it all.

I agree with you. I'm sure it would be quickly (and effectively) branded as being traitorous and unpatriotic... but... OH THE HYPOCRISY of it all.

-- Allen

Personally... perhaps we should just let them have Texas. All the Puritans can move there and leave the rest of us alone. Brownfields anyone?

[graham67]

4. We've all been screwed.

Some of us more than others. Secession isn't the answer.

[JasonBerry]

5. On a serious note

I honestly wonder what would happen in the event of a cataclysmic terrorist attack on Washington. I mean, as in losing the city and all of our elected representatives, losing all the people who run the engine of our country in the buildings of the social security administration, medicare, the Pentagon, etc.

I have wondered if this country could hold together. I have questioned if the chaos that would follow such a horrible event would not end up with certain states forming alliances that could eventually bring about the kind of scenario this post was about. Just as an example: a natural alliance being Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana......those three energy states would be in a position to call many a shot. The whole thing is a frightening thought. But, honestly, how could the fifty states function as a "united" union with all hell broken upon us?

[LifeDuringWartime]

9. there is a backup government

that is hidden in a nuclear attack-proof mountain somewhere. this isnt tinfoilhat, this is real. either ABC or CBS reported on it last year... Congress was very mad that they didnt know about it. it was set up right after september 11th.


:tinfoilhat:

[JasonBerry]

10. Yes, you are right, but....

This "shadow government" would have no authority and nobody to "vouch" for them in a non-existent capital. Fifty states would be left floundering and taking care of THEIR best interests and not listening to people (nobody has ever heard of) dug into a mountain hole. I have read a lot on that and even its supporters question the legitimacy of their authority. Of course, remember, there would also be no Supreme Court to make a decision either. It's scary.

[sweetheart]

13. If they nuked the federal, she would break up

I have no doubt that if by the grace of god, we were freed from the federal dictatorship in DC, that all states would seceed as fast as possible.

Imagine the hubris of the militarists if they got hit with a nuke? 2 buildings involved invasions and occupations of 2 countries. 100,000 buildings might involve a global agressive war, and no state would want to be associated with the nutters in the secret-mountain, as they would only get them killed.

I agree with redeye that secession is the answer.... but then again, i'm already an expat. :-)

[TNDemo]

7. We tried that once here.

Didn't work out.

[Pepperbelly]

11. bingo!!

I don't know what in the world some folk are thinking.

:shrug:

[maggrwaggr]

12. LOL!

"it didn't work out". Understatement of the day.

[Clete]

14. Well, we could make it nationwide.

IF the whole U.S. secedes from the federal government, they would be left sitting alone, with no territory to govern and no taxes coming in. Then we could form a new union and government. Of course to pull this off, we have to get the military to go along. Otherwise, we would be toast.

I know it's far-fetched but it makes a great fantasy in my mind. Imagine Bush waking up to find out he is President of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and nothing else.

[Yupster]

15. I bet there are lots of southern boys

who would volunteer to join the army to invade California to put down the secession. I bet the name of General Sherman would be used a lot.

[2cents]

16. but what if they use fundie logic

and decree the San Andreas fault is a divine sign that Cal should "break" away?

[Clete]

17. Oooh, I like that.

God has spoken. California should break away from the Christian USA because he put the San Andreas fault there as a sign. Can't you see that?