Secede is it a reality?

When you have a country composed of member States, which is getting economically shaky, like most of the Western world is at now, the Middle Eastern world is already there. The E.U. is getting there, with talk of Britain's withdrawal, from the E.U. Scottish independence talk E.T.C. Mainly brought about by the thinking that without the heel dragging of other commitments, life should be a lot better. Not to mention the breakup of the Soviets.
Where do the States of America fall in this present wave of Historic, Cessation talk, the last time the Confederated States did the deed, the Union soldiers put it down. The reason was Slavery, but was that the real reason?. Not many white men gave a toss about the plight of Negroes, as most of the founding slaves were Irish anyway. www.onpoint.wbur.org...

Just so you're aware, your article is from 2012.

originally posted by: anonentity
When you have a country composed of member States, which is getting economically shaky, like most of the Western world is at now, the Middle Eastern world is already there. The E.U. is getting there, with talk of Britain's withdrawal, from the E.U. Scottish independence talk E.T.C. Mainly brought about by the thinking that without the heel dragging of other commitments, life should be a lot better. Not to mention the breakup of the Soviets.
Where do the States of America fall in this present wave of Historic, Cessation talk, the last time the Confederated States did the deed, the Union soldiers put it down. The reason was Slavery, but was that the real reason?. Not many white men gave a toss about the plight of Negroes, as most of the founding slaves were Irish anyway. www.onpoint.wbur.org...

Our Constitution did not include any provision for a State's departure from the Union.

It's not really practical for virtually any American State to secede ... most are barely making it now with Federal aid.

The only peaceful solution would be to Amend our Constitution to allow for secession.

Secession is always an option. If the people of a state have decided that they are better off on their own apart from a union, then they really don't care what the laws of that union are anymore.

The real question is how the rest of the union will respond.

a reply to: anonentity

No, secession is not a reality. It didn't work the first time, and the states are no longer separate entities like they were anyway. Before the Civil War the "United States" was a collective noun. After the Civil War the "United States" became a singular noun--one country. "States' Rights" has eroded almost to the point of non-existence. The incentive to secede is completely gone. It won't happen, mostly because the citizens of the states no longer see their citizenship as belonging to a state, but to the whole nation.

originally posted by: schuyler
a reply to: anonentity

No, secession is not a reality. It didn't work the first time, and the states are no longer separate entities like they were anyway. Before the Civil War the "United States" was a collective noun. After the Civil War the "United States" became a singular noun--one country. "States' Rights" has eroded almost to the point of non-existence. The incentive to secede is completely gone. It won't happen, mostly because the citizens of the states no longer see their citizenship as belonging to a state, but to the whole nation.

Texas?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: schuyler
a reply to: anonentity

No, secession is not a reality. It didn't work the first time, and the states are no longer separate entities like they were anyway. Before the Civil War the "United States" was a collective noun. After the Civil War the "United States" became a singular noun--one country. "States' Rights" has eroded almost to the point of non-existence. The incentive to secede is completely gone. It won't happen, mostly because the citizens of the states no longer see their citizenship as belonging to a state, but to the whole nation.

Texas?

Not serious.

originally posted by: RomeByFire
Just so you're aware, your article is from 2012.

Yes I am because the pressure from that date economically has increased, and not receded. Their are later rumblings from Maryland and a few others. Quite a few Americans actually think that a State can secede, 28% if my memory serves me well, .The Constitution seems ambiguous.

originally posted by: anonentity

originally posted by: RomeByFire
Just so you're aware, your article is from 2012.

Yes I am because the pressure from that date economically has increased, and not receded. Their are later rumblings from Maryland and a few others. Quite a few Americans actually think that a State can secede, 28% if my memory serves me well, .The Constitution seems ambiguous.

Half the country thought they could secede in 1860. Didn't work then.

Where's the beef?

People do stuff when they are motivated to do stuff.

If secession will make something big and important better, then it can happen.

The COTUS makes no specific mention of leaving the Union, so by 9th Amendment i.e. only specifically enumerated powers are granted by the COTUS; and the 10th Amendment, i.e. All powers not specified are allowed to the States and the people,-- secession is obviously legal.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: anonentity

originally posted by: RomeByFire
Just so you're aware, your article is from 2012.

Yes I am because the pressure from that date economically has increased, and not receded. Their are later rumblings from Maryland and a few others. Quite a few Americans actually think that a State can secede, 28% if my memory serves me well, .The Constitution seems ambiguous.

Half the country thought they could secede in 1860. Didn't work then.

Where's the beef?

No beef, but we have a decade or so historically speaking where the maps are getting redrawn, Western Australia has talked of going alone, Canada etc. The U.S.A. cant be immune from this. As it has State Capitol buildings with State governors, if they are redundant why are they still there. Their has been a devolution of power in the U.K. where the Joined countries have representation in the E.U Council.
True It didn't work in 1860, but why not? well we know why not, and it cost more lives than any conflict the U.S.A. has been involved in since. Are we to assume that the Federal government is a bit like Hells Angels, like theirs only one way out.

a reply to: anonentity

What difference does it make if secession is a reality? In today's America, a lie is good enough if you can get enough people to believe it. Just like hope and change, weapons of mass destruction, we need the Federal Reserve, etc.

Just keep telling everyone that secession is perfectly legal according to the Constitution. Most people won't bother to look it up. If anyone argues the point, just call them racist and unpatriotic. That worked to sell the other lies. If you can get 2/3 to 3/4 of the people to believe it, secession will become a reality.

Maybe we could start by saying that secession will get people free stuff. Remember, "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

You are far far far more likely to see new states being added then states ever leaving. They are simply to tied together and no state could ever gets its population agree on it. Which is why it never has any support.

originally posted by: MrSpad
You are far far far more likely to see new states being added then states ever leaving. They are simply to tied together and no state could ever gets its population agree on it. Which is why it never has any support.

New states join because they would want more, they are expensive. As Russia has found out with Crimea.

An area that secedes

1) can issue gold backed money, which will always increase in value due to fractional reserve banking, and additionally will be accepted everywhere because it is gold backed.

2) wont have to pay fed taxes and waste time on fed regulations

In 1962 the government prohibited the Brown Shoe Company, which had 1 percent of the shoe market, from acquiring Kinney Shoes, which also had a whopping 1 percent market share at the time. A company with 2 percent of the market supposedly threatened competition in the industry, the government ludicrously claimed.

In 1969 IBM had a 65 percent market share in the computer market and was sued by the federal government for allegedly monopolizing the computer industry. IBM was mired in a court battle for thirteen years before the government finally gave up on the case. In the meantime, the company was eclipsed in the marketplace by Intel, Microsoft, and other companies. This governmental assault on IBM undeniably weakened the company.

In 1962 the government forced the Schwinn Bicycle Company to divorce itself from its network of dealers. Foreign competition then drove Schwinn into bankruptcy.

General Motors was never prosecuted for violating the anti-monopoly laws, but the company’s fear of antitrust drove it to adopt a policy from 1937 to 1956 of never allowing its market share among the “Big Three” automakers to exceed 45 percent. This contributed to the company’s competitive downfall at the hands of foreign automakers, especially ones from Japan.

RCA was prohibited by antitrust regulators from charging royalties to American licensees, so the company licensed its products to Japanese companies instead. This led directly to the overwhelming dominance of the Japanese electronics industry in the American marketplace.

DiLorenzo, Thomas J. (2012-07-20). Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government (pp. 22-23). Ludwig von Mises Institute. Kindle Edition.

so businesses would have reason to start or migrate there.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: anonentity
When you have a country composed of member States, which is getting economically shaky, like most of the Western world is at now, the Middle Eastern world is already there. The E.U. is getting there, with talk of Britain's withdrawal, from the E.U. Scottish independence talk E.T.C. Mainly brought about by the thinking that without the heel dragging of other commitments, life should be a lot better. Not to mention the breakup of the Soviets.
Where do the States of America fall in this present wave of Historic, Cessation talk, the last time the Confederated States did the deed, the Union soldiers put it down. The reason was Slavery, but was that the real reason?. Not many white men gave a toss about the plight of Negroes, as most of the founding slaves were Irish anyway. www.onpoint.wbur.org...

Our Constitution did not include any provision for a State's departure from the Union.

It's not really practical for virtually any American State to secede ... most are barely making it now with Federal aid.

The only peaceful solution would be to Amend our Constitution to allow for secession.

I think Texas would be better off on its own, as would some state groups.

Realistic though? Nope. Not unless the US has a carastrophic economic collapse.

a reply to: anonentity

When you have a country composed of member States, which is getting economically shaky, like most of the Western world is at now, the Middle Eastern world is already there. The E.U. is getting there, with talk of Britain's withdrawal, from the E.U.

Two points here..

To state the obvious, the Middle East is not a 'country', it's a region. Now granted, the Gulf States have been in talk of some kind of economic Union in the least (the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain etc.) but no present union exists.

Secondly, the EU is a supernational entity. It's a Union of independent nations. It's not a country by any definition (even though the intention is for it to become one whole country at some point).Sure, there's been talks of member states leaving, but as we saw with Greece, it's a tough thing to do.

Where do the States of America fall in this present wave of Historic, Cessation talk,

Nowhere. The right of states to secede was settled in 1865 with the defeat of the Confederacy. It was further settled in the Supreme Court case of Texas V. White 1869.

You've also got to understand that the vast majority of States in the Union were never sovereign at all. Instead they were carved up and out of Federal territory to become the States they are today. So the States of a America are in noway comparable to EU members, who held decades of independence, culture, prior to their admission. Not the same.

I won't touch you arguments for what caused the civil war. That is for another topic.

originally posted by: anonentity

No beef, but we have a decade or so historically speaking where the maps are getting redrawn, Western Australia has talked of going alone, Canada etc. The U.S.A. cant be immune from this. As it has State Capitol buildings with State governors, if they are redundant why are they still there. Their has been a devolution of power in the U.K. where the

I say again: Where's the beef? It's all talk. The maps are still the same. The secessions that have taken place were originally countries unto themselves that were gobbled up, like the Soviet Union. And like the original 13 colonies. Both had a history of independence prior to joining their unions.

Today the majority of states were never countries by themselves. They have no history of self-determination at all. It's not so much that the USA is "immune" from secessionist tendencies, but that there are no viable secessionist movements. That's not to say there aren't some organizations, like in Texas, that rattle their swords and issue proclamations, but the population isn't particularly interested.

Thinking secession is viable is just a wet dream of a few people. There is no particular advantage to do so.

a reply to: anonentity

I have been praying Texas would secede from the USA for years. With no doubt in my mind, I know we would be better off without them, they need us a hell of a lot more than we need them.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: anonentity

No beef, but we have a decade or so historically speaking where the maps are getting redrawn, Western Australia has talked of going alone, Canada etc. The U.S.A. cant be immune from this. As it has State Capitol buildings with State governors, if they are redundant why are they still there. Their has been a devolution of power in the U.K. where the

I say again: Where's the beef? It's all talk. The maps are still the same. The secessions that have taken place were originally countries unto themselves that were gobbled up, like the Soviet Union. And like the original 13 colonies. Both had a history of independence prior to joining their unions.

Today the majority of states were never countries by themselves. They have no history of self-determination at all. It's not so much that the USA is "immune" from secessionist tendencies, but that there are no viable secessionist movements. That's not to say there aren't some organizations, like in Texas, that rattle their swords and issue proclamations, but the population isn't particularly interested.

I would suggest that the Confederate States, still have a lingering memory of Cessation, as the Confederate flag gets a lot of press. They still call northerners Yankees. I don't think the self identity of the Confederated states is a total Myth yet.