3 ms·

We (USA) fought a war over that. The "if we agreed to stay together then we have to stay together" side won.

• jdc 7y ago
  But the scope of what "stay together" means has steadily grown since then.
• scythe 7y ago
  The Civil War was not about some kind of ideal of decentralization and certainly was not about today's pining for city-states. It was mostly about slavery, with some esoteric political theory tacked on to the Confederate Constitution to save face.
  • wolco 7y ago
    It was about only allowing white labor in the west. It was about the Lincoln winning without any representation from the south.
• labster 7y ago
  If it was about that, they would have made a case for secession before Congress prior to attacking Fort Sumter. Surely the right of revolution should only be invoked after at least making an effort at a compromise before attacking.
• stretchwithme 7y ago
  Not exactly. Those who wanted out of that fairly free arrangement did not want others to get out of literal bondage. The freedom to oppress is not what I was talking about.
• squiggleblaz 7y ago
  The domestic political processes of the United States, even when they amount to a civil war, are not binding on other states, however similar or dissimilar they be. I can imagine California would be prevented if they asked for independence today, but Scotland looked pretty much free to go if they'd wanted it recently.