Do You Support Sovereignty Self-determination?

#1
volinbham

volinbham

VN GURU
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
70,541
Likes
64,695
#1
So assuming the Crimea vote to be independent of Ukraine was legit or is done in a way that is legit.

I get the impression most here would support Crimea determining it's own fate.

Would you feel the same if a state like New Mexico decided likewise? Should they be able to secede?
 
#2
#2
That's tough. Let's say you have a huge influx of people that are not native to the area and all the sudden say they want to secede. Should it be ok?

I'm definitely torn on this issue with Russia. I partly understand where they are coming from, especially since they have a naval base there. I think if the roles were reversed, most western powers would do the same thing.
 
#3
#3
volinbham said:
So assuming the Crimea vote to be independent of Ukraine was legit or is done in a way that is legit.

I get the impression most here would support Crimea determining it's own fate.

Would you feel the same if a state like New Mexico decided likewise? Should they be able to secede?
Click to expand...


I wish Arizona would secede. Be a good place to go on vacation when you want to avoid the Mexicans and the gays. And don't even get me started on the Mexican gays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4
#4
Difficult question for sure.

If the referendum was done freely, not at the gun barrel of a Mexican soldier, I just might support their decision. I can see at sometime in our future another attempt at secession by parts of this country.
 
#6
#6
volinbham said:
So assuming the Crimea vote to be independent of Ukraine was legit or is done in a way that is legit.

I get the impression most here would support Crimea determining it's own fate.

Would you feel the same if a state like New Mexico decided likewise? Should they be able to secede?
Click to expand...

If it was legit, then yeah.
 
#8
#8
hog88 said:
Another good quality contribution. :eek:lol:
Click to expand...


Why thanks !!

But I seriously doubt that many people comprehend the difference between 1) Crimea, with centuries of linkage to Russia, Russian ports, and the complex economic issues they face relative to Russia and Ukraine, versus

2) a bunch of intolerant bastages and soccer Moms in a US state threatening secession because they don't want their kids going to school with that lesser element.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
lawgator1 said:
Why thanks !!

But I seriously doubt that many people comprehend the difference between 1) Crimea, with centuries of linkage to Russia, Russian ports, and the complex economic issues they face relative to Russia and Ukraine, versus

2) a bunch of intolerant bastages and soccer Moms in a US state threatening secession because they don't want their kids going to school with that lesser element.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to imply a certain race here. Didn't you call out Paul Ryan for trying to imply race awhile back?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
davethevol said:
What determines it being legit though?
Click to expand...

The legitimacy determines the legitimacy. Any person pronouncing it so does not determine it so.

That said, there are certain parameters we can use as guides, in declaring something legitimate; but, not in determining something legitimate (in the sense that because we say so it is legitimate; in fact, it ought to be the case that because it is legitimate, we say it is legitimate).
 
#14
#14
therealUT said:
The legitimacy determines the legitimacy. Any person pronouncing it so does not determine it so.

That said, there are certain parameters we can use as guides, in declaring something legitimate; but, not in determining something legitimate (in the sense that because we say so it is legitimate; in fact, it ought to be the case that because it is legitimate, we say it is legitimate).
Click to expand...

Ok.

So with Crimea, they say it is legit, the Russians say it is legit, and the west/Ukraine says it is not. Who is correct?
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
Why thanks !!

But I seriously doubt that many people comprehend the difference between 1) Crimea, with centuries of linkage to Russia, Russian ports, and the complex economic issues they face relative to Russia and Ukraine, versus

2) a bunch of intolerant bastages and soccer Moms in a US state threatening secession because they don't want their kids going to school with that lesser element.
Click to expand...

I would say more on this board understand the situation than you give credit for. Remember the majority here were not educated in Florida.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
Why thanks !!

But I seriously doubt that many people comprehend the difference between 1) Crimea, with centuries of linkage to Russia, Russian ports, and the complex economic issues they face relative to Russia and Ukraine, versus

2) a bunch of intolerant bastages and soccer Moms in a US state threatening secession because they don't want their kids going to school with that lesser element.
Click to expand...

That isn't at all what I was suggesting. New Mexico has long historic ties to Mexico and the scenario I was envisioning was more akin to the population feeling more connected to Mexico than the US but thanks for just taking partisan jabs as usual.
 
#19
#19
therealUT said:
The legitimacy determines the legitimacy. Any person pronouncing it so does not determine it so.

That said, there are certain parameters we can use as guides, in declaring something legitimate; but, not in determining something legitimate (in the sense that because we say so it is legitimate; in fact, it ought to be the case that because it is legitimate, we say it is legitimate).
Click to expand...

So, anything can be deemed legit even if it isn't or be deemed illegitimate even if it is though something should only "actually" be considered legit if it is, in fact, legit regardless of who is making the determination.

So more back to the original question; how can something be determined to be legitimate when you have opposing sides arguing the point? I wonder if final legitimacy in such instances boils down to who can back up their claim with sufficient force.
 
Last edited:
#20
#20
Yes and no. On the one hand, if there are true ties somewhere else, such as Crimea and Russia or a historical independent nature, such as Texas, then I would support it.

On the other, if there was just some major issue between, say New Mexico and the rest of the country, I think there should be efforts to resolve that before you break up the ties. But, I don't support violently maintaining the ties if the people want to separate.
 
#21
#21
davethevol said:
Ok.

So with Crimea, they say it is legit, the Russians say it is legit, and the west/Ukraine says it is not. Who is correct?
Click to expand...

One of them is correct. To sort out which party is correct takes more examination and closer scrutiny than I care to undertake. But, if the Crimean people feel either coerced by the Russians or if they feel they do not have a genuine choice (maybe they want out of the Ukraine but they do not want to join the Russians, yet they know that declaring themselves an independent nation puts them in an extremely vulnerable situation), then the decision is not legitimate.
 
#22
#22
hndog609 said:
So, anything can be deemed legit even if it isn't or be deemed illegitimate even if it is though something should only "actually" be considered legit if it is, in fact, legit regardless of who is making the determination.

So more back to the original question; how can something be determined to be legitimate when you have opposing sides arguing the point? I wonder if final legitimacy in such instances boils down to who can back up their claim with sufficient force.
Click to expand...

1. No, something is not legitimate merely because one says it is legitimate. Words do not determine truth.

2. It is not about who can back up their words with force. It is about whether or not the decision was free and uncoerced; i.e., whether it was, in fact, a sovereign decision. It either was or it wasn't. It is a highly complex issue with a great deal of factors. The Crimean gov't merely declaring, "We chose freely to do this" does not necessarily entail that they chose freely to do this. For instance, a beaten spouse might declare that she deserved to be beaten. Yet, that rarely entails the truth that she did deserve to be beaten.
 
#23
#23
I think that self determination should be welcomed even encouraged. But I look at the Crimea vote as being one that had some significant question about the veracity associated with it. If the vote was done under international observers and was entirely fair, then yes, I think we would/should have to support it as it was the determination of the people. But being that 93% of the vote came back to join Russia and staying in the Ukraine wasn't even an option on the referendum on top of having Russian troops occupying the land the vote was done under, it would lead a person to believe the vote was rigged.

Problem is power. The movie quote of "Those who have power are afraid to lose it" sums up any type of movement of secession to failure. Your New Mexico situation would be lost power by those who have power. Provided many if not most of the things that NM provides or produces can be replicated, it's the principle that if one does it, others will join in eventually. The Ukraine loses a significant portion of power by losing the Crimea and does not want to lose that.

Self determination is an interesting concept, but with the way politicians are power hungry these days, they would not want to see their territories and possessions go someplace else. And would want to fight to keep it.
 
#24
#24
therealUT said:
1. No, something is not legitimate merely because one says it is legitimate. Words do not determine truth.

2. It is not about who can back up their words with force. It is about whether or not the decision was free and uncoerced; i.e., whether it was, in fact, a sovereign decision. It either was or it wasn't. It is a highly complex issue with a great deal of factors. The Crimean gov't merely declaring, "We chose freely to do this" does not necessarily entail that they chose freely to do this. For instance, a beaten spouse might declare that she deserved to be beaten. Yet, that rarely entails the truth that she did deserve to be beaten.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I worded it poorly or you just misunderstood. My first paragraph was merely setting up the idea that something can be "deemed" (meaning stated to be) legit or illegit by anyone that feels they have a compelling argument. This seems to agree with your take so far but is really setting up the next part.

At some point when legitimacy in anything is to be determined it may have to come down to having to cut the red or green wire before the bomb goes off. If both sides believe they're right then somebody has to make a call on the legitimacy of one side vs the other regardless of who does or doesn't agree and I have a hard time envisioning the decision to have any actual meaning of any kind unless backed by force. The "what ought to happen" observations can be interesting but sometimes aren't (or even often aren't) realistically applicable.

Some legitimacy tests are fairly easy (paternity for instance) but what about when even the legitimacy of the parameters used to establish legitimacy can't be agreed on? The question still comes back to "Who decides?"*.

*Sports if full of this sort of thing. Any "Greatest Of All Time" discussion is fairly fraught with people climbing over the top of each other trying to legitimize their opinion with everybody weighting the parameters to fit their take.
 
#25
#25
The question of who decides is a tough question. And, yes, due to time constraints, information constraints, finite knowledge and understanding, we will get it wrong plenty.

None of these practical problems affect, in any way whatsoever, the following proposition:

If the decision is legitimate, then the people ought to be permitted to determine their system of government, to include determinations regarding independence, secession, and annexation.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top