4 ms·

I know it sounds nuts, but why not merge into Canada? Just get Oregon on board and you are golden.

larsiusprime 9y ago
It's unconstitutional and would trigger a second civil war? The federal position on the secession question has been pretty affirmatively settled: "no."
- zachberger 9y ago
  Wouldn't a constitutional amendment resolve this?
  - larsiusprime 9y ago
    Sure, but if the point of separation is to resolve a crisis where two sides can't agree I don't see how you'd get them to pass the one piece of legislation that requires the ultra-highest bar of consensus, across both the state and federal levels of government.
- jbattle 9y ago
  There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).
- jbattle 9y ago
  There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).
- aanm1988 9y ago
  A group leaving the country doesn't give 2 shits about the constitution. It comes down to how much you are willing to fight for it, and both sides would end up with nukes.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Quite a few conservatives have been planning a second civil war anyway due to demographic anxiety about whites no longer having an absolute popular majority, and their goal is to instead establish a majority white ethnostate founded on hardline religious principles. I'm not being hyperbolic here, and will happily supply you with abundant academically rigorous documentation of this. It's not a fringe movement either, but one of national scope and ambition that has been following a gameplan first developed in the 1980s. Now, I don't expect the western states to secede any time soon, but by 'soon' I mean within the next 5 years. A breakup of the US is fairly unlikely, but large-scale civil unrest is a significant and real possibility.
erik-g 9y ago
Because states can't leave the Union.
- olewhalehunter 9y ago
  "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among..."
  - larsiusprime 9y ago
    Ie, Civil War.
  - erik-g 9y ago
    I mean, I really want us as a country to follow the agreement, but not so badly that I want to dissolve the entirety of the United States and legally unravel our entire country over it. This, IMO, is not Civil War-worthy.
    - olewhalehunter 9y ago
      Would anyone be under any illusion that an armed US retaliation against the Pacific Northwest joining Canada would be anything other than just an invasion.
  - acchow 9y ago
    "... it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." I'm not sure why you're being downvoted.
thesmallestcat 9y ago
Mostly because no cost would be seen as too high for maintaining access to the Pacific. Also, the Pacific Coast and Sierra Nevada range are crucial elements of US defense strategy. The US also has some substantial military bases and accompanying sympathetic populations in CA, especially in the San Diego area.
- crucini 9y ago
  Seems like these problems are solvable. Give the USA some corridors to the Pacific, going through low density areas. Keep the military bases and a unified defense strategy; California can pay USA for defense. US has military bases in lots of countries; why not in California? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor
devrandomguy 9y ago
We'll trade you Alberta for the West Coast. I know, you're probably telling yourself "This is a terrible deal! Cali has a bigger population and economy than all of Canada!" But just remember, we helped you score Alaska for dirt cheap, so you owe us one.

It's unconstitutional and would trigger a second civil war? The federal position on the secession question has been pretty affirmatively settled: "no."

zachberger 9y ago
Wouldn't a constitutional amendment resolve this?
- larsiusprime 9y ago
  Sure, but if the point of separation is to resolve a crisis where two sides can't agree I don't see how you'd get them to pass the one piece of legislation that requires the ultra-highest bar of consensus, across both the state and federal levels of government.
jbattle 9y ago
There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).
jbattle 9y ago
There is a distressingly large portion of the country that would love to see California leave the us. (Or Kansas or Texas or New York).
aanm1988 9y ago
A group leaving the country doesn't give 2 shits about the constitution. It comes down to how much you are willing to fight for it, and both sides would end up with nukes.
anigbrowl 9y ago
Quite a few conservatives have been planning a second civil war anyway due to demographic anxiety about whites no longer having an absolute popular majority, and their goal is to instead establish a majority white ethnostate founded on hardline religious principles. I'm not being hyperbolic here, and will happily supply you with abundant academically rigorous documentation of this. It's not a fringe movement either, but one of national scope and ambition that has been following a gameplan first developed in the 1980s. Now, I don't expect the western states to secede any time soon, but by 'soon' I mean within the next 5 years. A breakup of the US is fairly unlikely, but large-scale civil unrest is a significant and real possibility.

erik-g 9y ago

Because states can't leave the Union.

olewhalehunter 9y ago
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among..."
- larsiusprime 9y ago
  Ie, Civil War.
- erik-g 9y ago
  I mean, I really want us as a country to follow the agreement, but not so badly that I want to dissolve the entirety of the United States and legally unravel our entire country over it. This, IMO, is not Civil War-worthy.
  - olewhalehunter 9y ago
    Would anyone be under any illusion that an armed US retaliation against the Pacific Northwest joining Canada would be anything other than just an invasion.
- acchow 9y ago
  "... it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." I'm not sure why you're being downvoted.

thesmallestcat 9y ago

Mostly because no cost would be seen as too high for maintaining access to the Pacific. Also, the Pacific Coast and Sierra Nevada range are crucial elements of US defense strategy. The US also has some substantial military bases and accompanying sympathetic populations in CA, especially in the San Diego area.

crucini 9y ago
Seems like these problems are solvable. Give the USA some corridors to the Pacific, going through low density areas. Keep the military bases and a unified defense strategy; California can pay USA for defense. US has military bases in lots of countries; why not in California? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Corridor

devrandomguy 9y ago

We'll trade you Alberta for the West Coast. I know, you're probably telling yourself "This is a terrible deal! Cali has a bigger population and economy than all of Canada!" But just remember, we helped you score Alaska for dirt cheap, so you owe us one.