Should any states become their own nations?

[PresidentMike]

Originally posted by Hamlet


You're defeating your own argument.

Ir is ridiculous to conclude that there is likely to be no legitimate basis for secesation anytime soon, and simultaneously conclude that there is likely to be no legitimate basis for overthrowing the government, but having one as a right and denying the other.

Unless you think one is inherently amoral, of course, which you apparently don't.

Secession cannot be allowed under the constitution. The constitution, as a democratic document that sets up a democratic system and allows for democratic modification, could not present justifiable grounds for sucession. If the constitution were to fail (if Nixon had called out the army to prevent congress from impeaching him, or the president surrenders the nation to invaders from space), we would be in very different territory.

Look at the history of the American Revolution. The way the founding fathers saw it, they didn't secede from the British constitution, because as far as they were concerned it was dead. The King had corrupted that system to the point where it was both intolerable and unalterable. In those conditions, and after great debate and consideration, we decided to leave.

 

[Hamlet]

Sorry, I have to go now. I'm on prefect duty all weekend. I'll continue this on Monday.

 

[Sims2789]

the problem with our Democracy is that the corprations have the power, not the people. we just choose between two evils, one of which is less evil than the other. the reason why the second ammendment was passed was so that people could rebel if their government was oppressive. if we go even closer towards Fascism, then their would be no point in preserving the Union. however, as of now, i'd help out the Americans if my state revolted.

 

[Drewcifer]

Minnesota could easily become it's own country. It is rich and has it's own culture which is different than the rest of the US. Our democracy especially, we have more competetive parties than just the Democrats and Republicans. Any of the many states and places in the US that have a strong sense of themselves could make a case for nationhood. The fact that we don't is part of what makes the country interesting to live in. Vive la difference.

 

[Shadylookin]

people seem not to understand what a state is. it is land that was conquered/found/bought/stolen/claimed by the federal government, they then make this place a territory and setup a territoral government so that they don't have to take care of all of it's affairs. Then this territory which was setup by the federal government, adopts it's own constitution(as long as it doesn't interfer with the federal one) and they get to ask for stateship. Then congress gets to take a vote on whether it should become a state. So a state is federal government property that gets it's own government and helps take care of the people in that state.

Now on the theoritical discussion if a state succeding from the union. I don't see it happening, I don't know about all state budgets but from what i'm seeing most are running in the red, or close to it. Now add the responsibilities of building up a army, having to take on the burden that the federal government once had, and not getting any federal money will most likly any state that succedes will colapse very quickly. If any thing we need to make more states, mabey have puerto rico become a state, or the virgin islands

 

[Sims2789]

California could just ally with Mexico and they're 190,000 man army and we wouldn't need much of an army. we would end the budget deficit since liberals would be running the state instead of neo-conservatives.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Originally posted by Shadylookin
people seem not to understand what a state is. it is land that was conquered/found/bought/stolen/claimed by the federal government, they then make this place a territory and setup a territoral government so that they don't have to take care of all of it's affairs. Then this territory which was setup by the federal government, adopts it's own constitution(as long as it doesn't interfer with the federal one) and they get to ask for stateship. Then congress gets to take a vote on whether it should become a state. So a state is federal government property that gets it's own government and helps take care of the people in that state.

Well, of course I learnt this in Dutch, but a state as described above does not meat the definition I was teached. I do get the point now though, but stand with my statement that it's a badly chosen title.

Originally posted by Shadylookin
Now on the theoritical discussion if a state succeding from the union. I don't see it happening, I don't know about all state budgets but from what i'm seeing most are running in the red, or close to it. Now add the responsibilities of building up a army, having to take on the burden that the federal government once had, and not getting any federal money will most likly any state that succedes will colapse very quickly. If any thing we need to make more states, mabey have puerto rico become a state, or the virgin islands [/B]

I don't think anyone can see a state leaving soon.

 

[h4ppy]

Originally posted by sims2789
California could just ally with Mexico and they're 190,000 man army and we wouldn't need much of an army. we would end the budget deficit since liberals would be running the state instead of neo-conservatives.

YOu mean like the current democratic governer balenced the budget. Even then you should look into the post above you about what the government pays for. The army, roads, courts/prisons, taxes, imports/exports, and immigration. California can't do all of that by itself, even if it could there would be a year long period before it could be set up where many problems would occur. Add to that making new treaties and a possible tariff on goods going to the U.S. and you have many problems.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

And if the people of Alaska decided they wanted to leave almost quite unanimously, what would you do? Go kill them all, in the name of freedom. Kind of contradictory.

If any state were to leave, the most likely candidate is Hawaii in my opinion.

 

[Sims2789]

the California budget deficit is there because of our Conservative Federal government cutting funds and because of Pete Wilson de-regulating energy.

 

[Cecasander]

Is it an issue, really?

 

[Perfection]

They all should, in my lifetime, I'd like to see 50 petty squabeling nations destroying the great US!

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

I think Hawaii should be independent. They have sure gotten the a**-end of the republics mighty stick.

 

[Wyrmshadow]

I'm sure if there is a state deserving to get the boot from the rest of the country it would be California at this time. But if you want pure independent spirit and tradition I vote Texas. I'm an Aggie and a Texan 1st, American citizen 2nd. And yes I do realize the irony, and that mode of thinking died out during Reconstruction, but when's the last time you visited the South?

 

[Jason The King]

A state is not it's own country. It seems to me here that some people are thinking of California for example, being its own country and able to secede. This is not the case. A state is set up to more democratically run the United States, so that it is more organized and representative.

How can a state government secede if it doesnt have land to secede with? The land in California is not Californian land, it is American land. The people living in California are not Californians, the are American. Though you may think of them as Californians, and they may think of themselves as Californians, that is just because they live under the state governmnet of California.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by sims2789
the problem with our Democracy is that the corprations have the power, not the people. we just choose between two evils, one of which is less evil than the other. the reason why the second ammendment was passed was so that people could rebel if their government was oppressive. if we go even closer towards Fascism, then their would be no point in preserving the Union. however, as of now, i'd help out the Americans if my state revolted.

Why don't you try posting for the next week without using the word fascist or any derivatives of it. Seriously. The only thing that annoys me more is when people can't make any sort of argument without comparing someone to Hitler.

 

[Sims2789]

i am NOT comparing bush to hitler. hitler was 1 million times worse than bush. plus, bush doesn't have a bad mustache.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Originally posted by eyrei


Why don't you try posting for the next week without using the word fascist or any derivatives of it. Seriously. The only thing that annoys me more is when people can't make any sort of argument without comparing someone to Hitler.

he never used Hitler in his argument, and fascism is not Hitler. He's just saying that he thinks it's getting more and more un-democratic in his country, and he has the right to have that opinion I think. Hell, I can even see why he has that opion, eventhough I think that if it continues at this pace it'll take another 10.000 years before the US will be at that point. But again, Fascism is not Hitler, Hitler is not fascism. Hitler's evil cannot be described in words.

 

[Free Enterprise]

If you call anything un-democratic Fascist the it is obvious you are not using the actual defination. There are many kinds of dictatorships that predate fascism. Fascism is roughly a socialist dicatorship.

 

[Free Enterprise]

If any state leaves the U.S. the decline of the United States is assured. Of course there are some people who want this to happen(Bin Laden whined about how he though the U.S. would break apart).