>their revealed preferences show them wanting to remain part of the federation All of them? 20% of California is still 4.5 million people. >America would by n

>their revealed preferences show them wanting to remain part of the federation All of them? 20% of California is still 4.5 million people. >America would by now be a few dozen independent, competing, conflicting countries 1. that is not proven. alternatives could have been chosen. 2. just because the Senate made sense among several mostly equal population states does not mean it makes sense today. >Canada (where Quebec is massively overrepresented in the federal parliament) And they have their own party. You cannot honestly believe that is an ideal situation. >UK (where England is the only constituent entity without its own legislature) The Scottish National Party exists, as do unionist and separatist terrorists in Northern Ireland. >Bosnia (whose three main ethnic groups split the Presidency equally despite having 50%/30%/15% of the population) Just because that makes sense for a young democracy does not mean it makes sense in California, a state with high cultural value given to equal voice and representation. >this superficially “unfair” deal ended the bloodiest war in European history since WW2 Are you threatening war if California asserts its natural rights to self-governance? Unionization under threat of violence is not unionization. It is slavery.