A few years ago, in one of those New Year "what does the future hold" scenarios, CA secession was listed as a near certainty to happen in the next century. Who knows?
Of course, if The Big One comes it may just slide into the Pacific and Nevada will become a popular seaside destination.
The nation is collapsing. Every use of unbacked currency has led to a collapse within 40 years. The USA is now entering the 43rd year since Nixon abolished gold backing and in the sixth year of a slow noisy collapse, counting from the double top in SPX in 2007. Yeah, I know, SPX just went to a new record high. It's also 30% above the moving average, and that only happens when the Fed props the market up with phony money. That is called a bubble, and you know what bubbles do.
Lots of people have talked about cessation for many years. Texas is a viable nation by itself, California's population is one out of eight Americans, and the rest of the continent is to some extent uninhabited.
California would not exit the USA, it would take the USA with it.
California has enough water to grow salad for the entire nation. And in any case, they can continue to get extra water the same way they always have. It will just be an international deal instead of an interstate deal.
Yeah. The USA isn't going to cut them off after treason. Yes California is an oasis of fresh water.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 30, 2017 9:13 PM MDT
Dear My2¢, Yes indeed, California secession has been a fringe idea for a long time now. However, Calexit gained momentum after this last presidential election, has gone mainstream, and there is now a referendum on the California voter ballot for 2019.
As I understand, the referendum simply gauges voter interest in beginning the multi-step move toward secession, not an actual secession-accomplished vote.
With 40 million people it's bigger than many countries (almost twice as populous as Oz). It's not an impossible move if the advantages of separation come to outweigh the advantages of union.,
Thing is that there is no legal or Constitutional provision for states leaving the Union. It would be considered subversion to the union just as it was in the Civil War. The Supreme Court even has a case precedent about this in Texas vs. White. It would essentially be treason and holding American citizens who did not want to separate hostage. Along with stealing land and finances from the Union as a whole. Same as when Texans and Vermonters talked about it. If a State were to leave that means handing over all it's US dollars, it's Military Bases, National Guard arms, and being cut off from infrastructure. There is no multi-step procedure in existence for succession and would mean another Civil War. It's suicidal on their part.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 30, 2017 6:08 PM MDT
That's an excellent post, Glis. I can see a few points that would be disputed under the law but overall I think you've nailed it. It would force a situation the Brits are dealing with in Northern Ireland. Many want independence and, superficially, it's easy to say, "Let them have it." But many prefer the links to England and the UK. In Yul Brynner's words, "It's a puzzlement."
Scotland is being pushed into asking for another referendum to become independent from the rest of the UK. They voted to stay just over a year ago but a certain troublemaking female is getting things stirred up again. Mrs May says she won't agree but then she's dealing with Brexit which would mean that if Scotland were to become independent they wouldn't be part of the EU. Which makes the UK, United Kingdom slightly less than united.
The reason behind the new vote appears to be that many people voted to stay in the UK because they would continue with EU membership. Now that won't happen the vote is very likely to go the other way. Interesting times ahead.
Northern Ireland is a whole other ballgame. Just like many think it's about religion but it has little to do with it. It's more about national identity. The religion is secondary and not primary. Hell not all Catholics are Republican or nationalists and not all Protestants are Loyalists/UInionists. A lot of it comes down to English expats moving there and protecting them.
My 2¢, be sure to look at the dialogue of Didge and Glis just above, if you have not already...I was looking through some of the Calexit literature, and they do specify they are not going to take up arms, or some such non-violent wording...in other words, they are aware that some sort of illegality may be involved...but their reasons for exploring exit are indeed quite compelling.
Hey Texan, " Yes California is the nonviolent campaign to establish the country of California using any and all legal and constitutional means to do so" There aren't any.
That is called "diplomacy". Diplomacy is defined as "saying nice doggie while looking around for a rock." Everybody knows that secession means an instant war. All they are saying is they are waiting for signs that they would win it.
lol... It's not diplomacy, it's throwing temper-tantrum. As said, these are the same people who are gonna say yes who made fun of Texans and called that treason. Now that they have a President they don't like or pick they want to leave the Union in less 6 months? It's absurd and disgusting. It certainly isn't diplomacy and they wont win a war. Not now, not ever.
What makes it even funnier and mockworthy is most of the complaints are the direct result of Federal policies..... That Californian's usually vote for and support. XD
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at April 2, 2017 10:14 PM MDT
Not Sure 