Would you allow secession?

Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by modernpaladin, Dec 3, 2018.

?

Would you allow polarized America to split into two nations?

  1. I lean left, I would allow it.

    7 vote(s)
    17.5%
  2. I lean right, I would allow it.

    16 vote(s)
    40.0%
  3. I lean left, I would not allow it.

    7 vote(s)
    17.5%
  4. I lean right, I would not allow it.

    10 vote(s)
    25.0%
  1. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Pre-Civil War, it was accepted that any state could leave. A state joined voluntarily, the federal govt was merely a temporary "loan" of some state power, and a state could leave if it desired.

    And post-civil war, those facts still remain.

    Everything in your post is inventive thinking created in the modern world, nothing in your post was even remotely considered true by the Founders of the nation.
     
  2. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    While esoterically interesting, people argueing the legality of secession ignore one glaring problem - if a state is so disgruntled that it wants to leave, all viable options have been investigated, then why would you want to force that state to remain a part of something it deeply hates? Its a guarantee of trouble.

    Look at the US civil war, the South was ruined, it did not recover economically (as measured by "Southern GDP") until the middle 20th century, and there is resentment by Southerners even today, and don't forget the contempt that Northerners still feel for Southerners.

    Consider the cost of that war - the lives lost, the disabled, the huge economic cost from both sides which was a drag on the USA economy for 100 years. It would have been better to just let the Southern states leave.

    Its global, not just the USA. When a nation forces a group to stay, its a chronic problem. For example, the Catalan region of Spain.
     
    Talon likes this.
  3. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I asked this 4 times now.
    Crickets.
     
    Battle3 likes this.
  4. AlifQadr

    AlifQadr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Messages:
    3,077
    Likes Received:
    899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Talon, As is known by my approach to this discussion, I am one who views the Constitution of the United States of America, as an open contract. In using the term "open", it is approached as ratified, that it is incomplete, meaning that there is room for improvement, via Constitutional Amendments. Also, I am one in the anti-federalist camp, because the more power given to a body that is disconnected from most of the population, tends to open the door for the growth and development despotic and tyrannical behavior, as seen in the behaviors of the DOJ, James Comey, The Clinton Foundation, George Soros, Sheldon Adelson, Sayer, Micheal R. Bloomberg, etc.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
    Talon likes this.
  5. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Probably because thats a defining question. It puts a person with the murderous tyrants or the Constitution and the people.
     
    Talon likes this.
  6. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's no real wonder why those most opposed to secession are liberals and/or Democrats.
     
    Battle3 and AlifQadr like this.
  7. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think it all boils down to this question: At what point are we willing to deprive people of their fundamental human, civil and political right of self-determination?

    I know all about - I live in Virginia and our state bore the brunt of that war. In fact, towns like Petersburg - the site of the siege that was the last great battle in the East - have never recovered and probably never will, and as your correctly pointed out old animosities still linger amongst us, although things have gotten much better since the 1960s.

    I get what you're saying, but as a Southerner who never sympathized with the Confederacy and its defense of the indefensible - slavery - I can't say that we would have been better off just letting the South leave. As William Faulkner pointed out Man cannot defy Nature - most particularly his own - with impunity, and the South made the mistake of thinking it could and paid the consequences for its arrogance.

    As the old saying goes, it's complicated...

    No doubt about it.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  8. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Because people understand that too many 'people', corporations, and the Federal government - outside the state - hold assets and real property in a state...and have no say in if that state should stay or leave the union.
     
  9. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wait... if the population of California overwhelmingly wants to leave, they should not be allowed to because of a relative handful of people that do not live in California?
     
  10. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm pretty much of the same mind, Alif. I revere the principles that the Constitution was based on but I regret that it was joined at the hip with a federal government that is increasingly becoming the bane of our existences.

    I've often wondered what Alexander Hamilton would make of his creation today. It seems his colleague Madison came to second-guess himself about it...
     
    AlifQadr likes this.
  11. TexMexChef

    TexMexChef Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    503
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If the population of California overwhelmingly wants to leave, there is nothing stopping them from leaving.

    I posted nothing stating that people outside the state would keep a state from seceding. I stated that a reason a state could not seceded is all the contracts and connections a state has with other states, people, corporations and the federal government to stay a state.

    It has nothing to do with the relative size of either group.
     
  12. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Think about your statement - you are willing to deprive people of their fundamental rights. You do not believe in inalienable rights, but believe that people should control other people. You have answered the question, you are siding with the tyrants.

    Slavery is a false arguement.

    The Civil War was not fought over slavery, Lincoln agreed to grandfather slavery in the seceding states if they would not secede. Lincoln only freed the slaves in the South because he thought it would cause problems for the seceding states and give the North an advantage. The civil war was fought over economics.

    There were even talks behind the scenes about a negotiated split, the South had even agree to 99 year leases on Union naval bases in Southern states. If it was not for some overly active Southern officer firing on Ft. Sumter, the USA may have peaceably split.

    The days of slavery in the South were ending due to mechanization and industrialization, and social pressure. Civil War or not, slavery would have ended.
     
  13. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Epic strawman, Battle.

    First of all, I made my answer to the question "Would you allow secession?" crystal clear:

    Secondly, the question I asked does not imply some willingness on my part to deprive people of their fundamental right to self-determination. If the people of California or any other state/commonwealth wanted to secede from the United States today I would be perfectly fine with it. The point of my question was to articulate exactly what we're talking about when we talk about secession.

    The CW was fought over a lot of things but the root cause was slavery. Evidently, we're going to have to agree to disagree on that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  14. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it would not, Slaves were the largest single block of assets in the South, possibly the entire US and maybe even the world. No government then existing could have afforded to buy them all, let alone afforded to buy and free them and nobody was going to just give up that much value without a fight.

    Mechanization and industrialization could have continued right along with slavery. Contrary to slavery apologists but in keeping with common sense you could indeed staff factories with slaves. Quite a few plantations did and many others had large numbers of highly skilled slave workers. Field work could be and was mechanized some even before slavery ended. Slaves were quite useful as large numbers of domestics supporting owners in a standard of luxury unavailable in ANY sort of salaried arrangement. And finally you are forgetting that a slave could be made to sleep with you and breeding them could be, (and often was, even for Thomas Jefferson,) the really fun part of slave ownership. Slavery was NOT going away on its own.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  15. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just because the following is always trotted out, it never makes the argument right: "
    The Civil War was not fought over slavery, Lincoln agreed to grandfather slavery in the seceding states if they would not secede. Lincoln only freed the slaves in the South because he thought it would cause problems for the seceding states and give the North an advantage. The civil war was fought over economics."

    Slavery caused the war. Every symptom of the conflict is always traced back to slavery as the root cause.
     
  16. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    We can disagree, but I go with the facts.
     
  17. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The facts make it very clear that the symptoms of the CW all go to the root cause, slavery.
     
  18. KJohnson

    KJohnson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,740
    Likes Received:
    2,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    That is not what I was implying...Antonin Scalia was wonderful. But things have drastically changed since his passing that he nor anyone else could have possibly contemplated in a million years. He would roll over in his grave if he knew how much more the democrats are showing their corruption right out in the open now. They don't even bother to hide it anymore. Nor do they care if anyone knows it because they're so above the law, their supporters are fully on board and brainwashed, and they OWN everyone in DC including the FBI, DOJ, and probably CIA as well. So since apparently no one these days can bring them to justice, this will only empower them going forward and make them worse.

    There is no longer "Justice for all" in the US. Only justice left is determined by democrats who are a serious crime organization.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  19. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Scalia would have opposed Trump as best he was able, if he were alive.
     
  20. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,212
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hyper-partisan poopdoodle.

    In no state is there any legislative initiative or pending referendum to renounce the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Several once attempted it to preserve and spread slavery. There is no issue comparable to slavery to incite them or any others to try it again.
     
  21. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And the answer is they don't. You're welcome.
    Because I don't want Russki/Chicom air bases in Lompoc or Tampa. You're welcome.
    Please, you clearly implied that I needed to argue against 10A to refute the constitutionality of unilateral secession...
    ...so surely we can dispense with such recitations of the obvious.
    I have yet to advance that argument here. You get that, right?
    You have got to be kidding. How the hell am I supposed to take seriously...

    [O]nce the States have seceded from the Union, the Constitution is no longer in force in regard to the seceded political body.​

    ...an argument which apparently (didn't click on the link) rests on the premise that the legitimacy of unilateral secession is a given?
    That is not an answer from Calhoun and Jefferson. That is an answer from the author, presumably based on quotes from each. Calhoun was of course correct as to the dictionary definition of "sovereignty", but all indications I'm aware of are that such was not the operating definition of the framers of the Articles of Confederation. As for the claim he attributes to Jefferson, anyone who reads the AoC can see that it's nonsense - to say nothing of the assertion that even in 1776, the sovereignty of individual states was more than nominal, which is subject to plenty of reasonable doubt by anyone even remotely aware of the tenor of those times.

    And neither answers the question, as there is no reference to 10A in either.
    You would do better to reflect on the absence of any mention of sovereignty in the Constitution, in contrast to the AoC.
    The inference was not left by the Framers, it was drawn by others - and from what I've seen, none of those others lived in the founding era. Hell, I've never seen hide or hair of any such inference drawn by Confederates, who would have had every reason to do so.
    Does 1786 count as pre-CW in your little slice of spacetime? Because it sure as Hell wasn't accepted then.
    Kind of a shame that they're also utterly unsupportable, if your posts may be taken as indicative.
    Then providing contemporaneous documentation to that effect on a par with the Constitution and AoC won't be a problem, so get the hell on with it already.
    Those who make the contrary argument ignore a rather more compelling reality: the US never existed in a geopolitical vacuum.
     
  22. KJohnson

    KJohnson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,740
    Likes Received:
    2,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I didn't claim any state had a pending referendum....I said it'll probably come to that at some point and if so, I will be one of the first in line. Nothing greater could happen for the good of this country or rather half of it than if we just split from all the corrupt annoying bat shiit crazy liberals who accomplish nothing and are like an anchor taking us all down.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  23. KJohnson

    KJohnson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,740
    Likes Received:
    2,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Nah, I don't think so. I do think he would have been completely appalled at how Kavanaugh was treated and at the blatant criminality of the democratic party for sure, Hillary Clinton in particular.
     
  24. KJohnson

    KJohnson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Messages:
    2,740
    Likes Received:
    2,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    1. How about liberals refuse to accept conservatives in office to the point if conservatives win, they do nothing except throw tantrums and call for investigation after investigation and even create false reports to obtain warrants to spy without any credible evidence to support their claims?
    And why? Because they hope to find some type of crime that will allow them to start impeachment proceedings

    2. Because like a cancer, they've been embedded into our schools and university's and are brainwashing oh kids all across the nation.

    3. Because they're always striving to remove the 1st, 2nd, and 5th amendments.

    4. Because they've seated corrupt judges all across the nation to rule in favor of their corruption especially regarding sanctuary cities.

    5. Because they're rigging elections and are planning to overtake the voting process by using illegals. They hope thousands more will still come across the border and give them the votes needed to win in 2020. If so and they get in,, they'll make sure to never lose office again.

    Bottom line democrats in offices these days are horrible corrupt SOCIOPATHS completely driven by power.

    Like Brexit, this country would be far better without them and conservative America should consider splitting the nation as well or they'll continue taking us down with them.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2018
  25. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Would you allow polarized America to split into two nations?

    "Split it"? If it were up to me I'd split it alright .... I'd split the heads of both the 'gun toting, immigrant hating rednecks' AND the "welcome anyone and everyone buffoons" and then I'd enforce gun control and illegal immigration. I'd unite the nation - not split it.

    Does that answer your question?
     

Share This Page