Suppose it were possible to split America in half with all the 'gun toting, immigrant hating rednecks' willing to move to one side and all the 'collectivist utopian SJW's' willing to move to the other. The decision is up to you. Would you allow it?
Only two? Hell, lets split it into 50 nations, or more. There are SJW rednecks too. And gun toting immigrant lovers. Lets split this nation back into the individual states it was meant to be from the beginning.
Good idea but technically impossible. Unless... "Kill them all, God will know his", do you know who said that phrase?
wasn't self determination the founding principle that led to the creation of the US? it seems to me that most people support self determination movements in other countries but just never when it happens in their own country just like any divorce if someone wants out it's unhealthy to force the unhappy partner to stay.
The Commander of the First Crusade, and he was explaining to the Pope why the Crusaders had killed everyone in Jerusalem, including the Christians. A massacre which was considered excessive even in Medieval times As Emperor I do not allow my subjects to break up my polity.
Actually it is attributed to Arnaud Almaric at the slaughter at Beziers, a town in France, during the Albigensian Crusade. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caedite_eos._Novit_enim_Dominus_qui_sunt_eius.
The US is a republic of 50 sovereign states, all of which voluntarily chose to enter the union. Why would anyone NOT allow one of more of them to leave?
Oldenbourg's text on the subject doesn't mention the phrase and she is very thorough on the Matter of Outremer so i will bow to superior scholarship. It did seem to fit the Jerusalem massacre as well.
it's part of the UN charter agreed to by the USA - All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. That was the agreement in regards to decolonization but it's not big stretch to apply that to any population. Czechoslovakia agreed to peaceful democratic separation into two states, Canada has had two votes on secession by the province of Quebec both would've been respected if that was the democratic choice. The EU allows the UK to leave, Brexit, the UK will allow Scotland and Northern Ireland the same if they choose to leave. It's just not worth any bloodshed to deny a people the right to self determination, to do so would be childish petty nationalism...
like this quote , “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” I've seen it often credited to Sun Tzu or Niccolo Machiavelli but the most reliable sources point to fictional character Michael Corleone...even it was written by Mario Puzo it's something Sun Tzu and Machiavelli would have lived by as well...
The question of a state's legal right to secede was addressed in the 1869 Supreme Court decision of Texas v. White. In that decision, the Supreme Court stated that beginning with the Articles of Confederation the agreement between the states to form a union was to "be perpetual." The court went so far as to state that when the states agreed to "form a more perfect Union" there was nothing that more clearly asserted the belief in their indissoluble unity. The significance of this decision was reinforced by Justice Antonin Scalia, who in 2006 wrote that if there was any single right decided by the Civil War it was that there is no right for a state to secede from the union. This position, asserted by the founding documents of the United States, remains the position the United States and its Supreme Court maintain to this day. https://classroom.synonym.com/did-t...h-during-the-american-civil-war-12085524.html Further, individual Americans have, at one time or another, commonly sworn an oath that disallows secession. "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
and at one time slavery was legal, and women weren't allowed to vote, native americans weren't allowed to vote, abortions were illegal, hanging people for witchcraft was legal, pot was illegal, alcohol was illegal...laws change because laws are fallible ...pledges are anachronistic boy scout clap trap, meaningless jingoism...
there doesn't need to be a legal initiative...if a state or region decides to leave by referendum I would say nothing will be done to stop it...while it may have been acceptable in the 19th century to wage war and carnage to stop succession the appetite to do so again isn't present but among the most hard line nationalists...a number of countries have had their secessionist uprising and bloodshed it isn't something they want to revisit, allowing people peaceful self determination is the best way forward
I do not anticipate any serious attempt by a state to secede either. Such a radical move by any state would result in massive internal hostilities.
Oppose. Secession doesn't solve the problem you think it does. The geographic divide is really rural/urban. There is a better way to do this: 1. Federalism. Amazingly, the founders were pretty smart, and they figured a large diverse country would find different answers to issues and should be free to presume them. 2. Interstate compacts. It's already legal, just like State concealed carry licenses can be used in other states, like minded polities should join together to do things they want to do, without including everyone by force. Ex: States could form an interstate health plan for those people who really want to pay for some version of national health insurance, without bothering other people.
Looks to me like another Crusade has been forming for quite awhile now. Same church same game, use a foreign army to invade and take over a land. Succession won't work ,once they get in and destroy one state they will move to the next one till there is nothing left but another third world.
why, do you think your special? ... number of countries populations have moved on from petty nationalism and rejected hostilities as a response to secession...it's no longer acceptable to beat your wife when she wants out of bad relationship...
Each state was supposed to be it's own nation. In a place like that, you probably wouldn't need secession.