Can you numb skulls explain...

[Duddha]

No, because 98% Californians would oppose sucession and thus overwhelm the other 2%. The illusion that millions of Californians will fight till the death for their "nation" is nonsense. Most Californians, like the rest of the nation, will consider this a terrorist act and thus be pleased with the notjobs being removed from power.

I can't speak for others, but my posts have been written with the assumtion that California would secede through a democratic process(ie popular referendum). I don't believe that Californians would "fight to the death", well because first of all I don't believe it would come to that.

What scares me, is that there are people on this forum who cannot agree to the proposition that California should be able to secede if its people wanted to. The only rational I can come up for these people is that they believe in "America" with some kind of irrational idolic ferver.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

You're, like, not a friendly person.

Maybe I should, like, say "dude" more often?

I'm Californian too, you know. I'm usually pretty darned laid back. But these crazy ideas have to be faced with the facts.

So you haven't read either and don't believe in international law. I think I can leave this to everyone one else to decide what kind of a person you are.

And if an international law isn't enforced, what's going to happen? Is God going to descend from the clouds and smite us all with holy thunderbolts?

For the last time, a law is valid if there is an authority that CAN enforce it and IS WILLING TO enforce it. Under no other circumstances. That's just life.

Basicly, you believe if the people of California decided to secede in a transparent and legitimate referendum, the United States would be correct in occupying California by force. Before you go any further in this argument I want you to agree that a violent occupation of California would be wrong. If you can't do that, this discussion can go no further because you have no moral sense.

On the issue of practicality, California is the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world depending on the year, equal to France. Do you think the US could succesfully violently occupy France? California is the center of world culture, trade, entertainment, and attention, do you think the violence associated with an occupation will go unnoticed by the rest of the world? Imagine what that would mean for America.

What's the point of this craziness? THE OVERWHELMING, GIGANTIC MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS DON'T WANT SECESSION! Get that through your head!

Suppose I decide I don't like taxes and decide that I personally am going to secede from the USA and form my own country. Ridiculous! So why should a state be allowed to?

 

[Duddha]

And if an international law isn't enforced, what's going to happen? Is God going to descend from the clouds and smite us all with holy thunderbolts?

For the last time, a law is valid if there is an authority that CAN enforce it and IS WILLING TO enforce it. Under no other circumstances. That's just life.

lol, , thunderbolts! anyways, For the sake of practicality, international order, and security, the US would be obliged to reconize California's independance.

What's the point of this craziness? THE OVERWHELMING, GIGANTIC MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS DON'T WANT SECESSION! Get that through your head!

At no prior point have we discussed the merits of California secession and this point does not relate to my previous points, making it irrelevant. I believe my previous point rebutt what you were saying about "practicality".

Suppose I decide I don't like taxes and decide that I personally am going to secede from the USA and form my own country. Ridiculous! So why should a state be allowed to?

A state is not one person, and if you do want to become a one man country, you can go out into the ocean, capture an oil platform in international waters.

 

[covok48]

"What scares me, is that there are people on this forum who cannot agree to the proposition that California should be able to secede if its people wanted to. The only rational I can come up for these people is that they believe in "America" with some kind of irrational idolic ferver."


Conveniently called reality.

 

[Duddha]

Conveniently called reality

Thank you for reminding me that I'm a Californian.

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by Duddha
The state democrats are one vote short of 2/3 in both the state house and senate. I believe that constitutes a overwhelming majority.

If you made it 55% then it'd effectively be a one party system. that's what they're trying to avoid.

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by Sims2789
^what do u have against mexicans? their skin not light enough for you? although i do not agree with Duddha about the seccesionist issue, i can see how he can support it due to the belief that many Americans are Californiaphobes(you're one of them!).

i'm only joining in. i don't really care, but california is the one place in the US that i've been. i try not to base my views of america on that

 

[KaNick]

Originally posted by bobgote

If you made it 55% then it'd effectively be a one party system. that's what they're trying to avoid.

What's the problem with that, as long as everyone is legally elected.

 

[Speedo]

Basicly, you believe if the people of California decided to secede in a transparent and legitimate referendum, the United States would be correct in occupying California by force. Before you go any further in this argument I want you to agree that a violent occupation of California would be wrong. If you can't do that, this discussion can go no further because you have no moral sense.

Ok bud, we already have precedent on this exact issue. In the United States of America, a state does NOT have the right to secede, even if it's voted on. If a state does attempt to secede, then the federal govternment IS justified in using force, violent occupation, or whatever you want to call it to suppress that rebellion.

You can try to make California sound as special as you want, but the law still applies to it. Until such time that the Constitution is changed or abandoned, the above applies to EVERY state.

 

[De Lorimier]

For the few of you who played Grand Theft Auto Vice City: If you listen to VCPR on a car radio you'll hear Florida's separatist John Hickory. That guy's hilarious! Reminds me of someone in this thread...

 

[IglooDame]

Originally posted by Duddha
, thunderbolts! anyways, For the sake of practicality, international order, and security, the US would be obliged to reconize California's independance.

You mean like, say, mainland China's recognition of Taiwan's independence? It is arguable that the only thing that has ever prevented the Chinese from invading Taiwan is the US 7th Fleet.

 

[Duddha]

Ok bud, we already have precedent on this exact issue. In the United States of America, a state does NOT have the right to secede, even if it's voted on. If a state does attempt to secede, then the federal govternment IS justified in using force, violent occupation, or whatever you want to call it to suppress that rebellion.

This comes down to a fundemental difference, I believe in international law, while you don't.

For the few of you who played Grand Theft Auto Vice City: If you listen to VCPR on a car radio you'll hear Florida's separatist John Hickory. That guy's hilarious! Reminds me of someone in this thread...

Glad you're enjoying the topic.

 

[Duddha]

You mean like, say, mainland China's recognition of Taiwan's independence? It is arguable that the only thing that has ever prevented the Chinese from invading Taiwan is the US 7th Fleet.

And while California my not have a literal fleet sitting off our waters, we do have the fifth largest economy...so on, don't need to repeate, which would have the same effect as a the "7th fleet".

 

[GrandAdmiral]

edit: nevermind

 

[Zamphyr]

Originally posted by Duddha
Well, the final results aren't in but it looks like Prop 56 in California will fail. (For thoes not familiar Prop 56 would have changed the requirement for passing a state budget in the state house and senate from 2/3 to 55%) Can one of you explain why we should keep the 2/3 voting rule? (which has forced the state democrates to literally bribe one house and senate republican with porkbarrel projects every time they try to pass a budget, in a democratic majority controlled legisature) How does this make any sense for anyone?

So you're pissed because you couldn't get 50.1% of the people to support you're ballot prop eliminating super-majority rule ? The answer is : Californians are getting exactly what they voted for.

As for succession, You also seem to wonder why the rest of the US population are "Californiaphobes". I've never sensed this. I lived in CA for 2 years, rest of the US much longer. I submit that you may be a self-hating American, trying to raise yourself above the rest of the US. If there are things you don't like about the US, get involved and change them, don't pout and say "Give me my ball (and my large economy), I'm going home."

 

[Speedo]

This comes down to a fundemental difference, I believe in international law, while you don't.

Not at all. The international law says that self determination is a right, and the US has determined for itself that states cannot secede.

 

[Duddha]

Not at all. The international law says that self determination is a right, and the US has determined for itself that states cannot secede

I do hope you see the basic contradiction in that statement. good day

 

[Speedo]

Originally posted by Duddha




I do hope you see the basic contradiction in that statement. good day

So now you see how stupid the international law is.

Self-determination is a right, but a country doesn't have the right to use it's self-determination to tell the international body to piss off about it's internal affairs?

 

[Duddha]

Self-determination is a right, but a country doesn't have the right to use it's self-determination to tell the international body to piss off about it's internal affairs?

What you are talking about is state-soveriegnty, not self-determination, although they are related.

self-determination --(underlining principle/leads to)---> State Sovereignty

State-soveriegnty allows a state to say piss off to all other states up until the point that that nation is abusing the rights (from UN Charter, Human Rights...ect.) of its citizens (ei. self determination).

 

[KaNick]

Originally posted by Duddha


And while California my not have a literal fleet sitting off our waters, we do have the fifth largest economy...so on, don't need to repeate, which would have the same effect as a the "7th fleet".

How long do you think that that economy would last after we blockade your harbors and control your airspace. Not only is the idea of California ridiculous, it is impossible.