3 ms·

UK is better than US on this point. If Texas wanted to secede would the other states let them?

by MarkMc 12y ago

cyphunk 12y ago
yes
TheCondor 12y ago
We have already fought a war because of that issue, we even added it to the pledge of allegiance. It's some what different in that England was an empire, they aren't giving up land but releasing it. As an American, what I find truly fascinating is that they trust democracy with such a substantial issue. Can you imagine how things would be if we had a simple up/down vote on abortion or gay marriage or the war on terror?
- arethuza 12y ago
  Slight nitpick: the UK is a union not a remnant of the Empire. The leaders of Scotland at the time, partially due to a failed colonial expedition to Darien, agreed to the Union. Edit: One interesting part of this story is that the Union was pretty much bought - the English bailed out Scotland and the institution that was created to handle the payments eventually evolved into the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).... famous for briefly being the largest bank in the world and one of the largest casualties of the recent financial crisis, requiring a vast bailout from UK taxpayers....
ctdonath 12y ago
At this point, methinks there is not the top-down passion for unity that would stop secession. If those wanting out are sufficiently unified and intend to impose a new order by sheer will (a la "consent of the governed"), the central gov't will not have the will to maintain/restore status quo thru force. I actually expect some morning radio stations in the southwest USA will declare "it's time for Azltan's independence", millions will simultaneously just refuse to comply with existing sociopolitical infrastructure, and those in authority will simply have no idea what to do about it - or may even support it, given the developing tribalism. We'd lose about half the land of at least three states in the process. Individual states not having their own armed militia, they could not stop it (the "National Guard" troops of each state can, and would, be "called out" by the central gov't as a trump move for purposes to defuse their influence). Things would get very tense, but separation would ultimately be peaceful. Texas has long been considered to have some ill-understood legal standing to ease secession (being the only state to volunteer for annexation as a former independent country), but I don't see that actually happening. It's akin to an oft-angry spouse who frequently threatens divorce but never actually will.

UK is better than US on this point. If Texas wanted to secede would the other states let them?

by MarkMc 12y ago

UK is better than US on this point. If Texas wanted to secede would the other states let them?

cyphunk 12y ago

yes

TheCondor 12y ago

We have already fought a war because of that issue, we even added it to the pledge of allegiance. It's some what different in that England was an empire, they aren't giving up land but releasing it. As an American, what I find truly fascinating is that they trust democracy with such a substantial issue. Can you imagine how things would be if we had a simple up/down vote on abortion or gay marriage or the war on terror?

arethuza 12y ago
Slight nitpick: the UK is a union not a remnant of the Empire. The leaders of Scotland at the time, partially due to a failed colonial expedition to Darien, agreed to the Union. Edit: One interesting part of this story is that the Union was pretty much bought - the English bailed out Scotland and the institution that was created to handle the payments eventually evolved into the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).... famous for briefly being the largest bank in the world and one of the largest casualties of the recent financial crisis, requiring a vast bailout from UK taxpayers....

ctdonath 12y ago

At this point, methinks there is not the top-down passion for unity that would stop secession. If those wanting out are sufficiently unified and intend to impose a new order by sheer will (a la "consent of the governed"), the central gov't will not have the will to maintain/restore status quo thru force. I actually expect some morning radio stations in the southwest USA will declare "it's time for Azltan's independence", millions will simultaneously just refuse to comply with existing sociopolitical infrastructure, and those in authority will simply have no idea what to do about it - or may even support it, given the developing tribalism. We'd lose about half the land of at least three states in the process. Individual states not having their own armed militia, they could not stop it (the "National Guard" troops of each state can, and would, be "called out" by the central gov't as a trump move for purposes to defuse their influence). Things would get very tense, but separation would ultimately be peaceful. Texas has long been considered to have some ill-understood legal standing to ease secession (being the only state to volunteer for annexation as a former independent country), but I don't see that actually happening. It's akin to an oft-angry spouse who frequently threatens divorce but never actually will.