volprof
Destroyer of Nihilists
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2011
- Messages
- 18,149
- Likes
- 10,064
Grand Vol, you asked about why I haven't answered Hog's question. Well, partly because I just now checked this forum again and partly because incoherent babel grads my ears (or eyes, as the case may be).
Anyhow, apparently both of you have some question that has something to do with my disaffinity to secession.
Okay.
So, the following about that:
1.The right of a state to secede is a contentious one. It's not nearly as clear-cut as many of you on here typically make it out to be. Post-Civil War rulings have suggested that it's not a right unilaterally, and that a majority of states need to agree to it (which I can abide by, halfway, at least, depending upon context and circumstances).
Now, like I said, this is post-War, so if you want to criticize such rulings for anti-secessionist/anti-Southern bias, then that's fair.
I will remind such critics, however, to be very mindful of capital and geography, two things that often go unnoticed when passions run deep. A) The US was not about to let the Mississippi basin, its source of shipping and agricultural power go; and, B) The South had no actual capital. It was merely a loose confederation of wealthy slave-owners who honestly, despite how bad the Reconstruction South was, would have led us (Southerners, my family included) into serious ****-hole-dom, had they won. I'm glad they didn't.
If you think the South is a bunch of moochers now (which it is, per capita), then you ought have seen the welfare state or chaos/in-fighting bunch of **** it would have turned into had the South one. Without any mineral or energy resources from the interior of the US (which most likely would have been shut off after independence), and with mixed foreign relations as a result, it would most likely have ended up either a failed state or a European whorehouse.
But that's just my educated opinion.
2. Working off that last part, concerning foreign influence, any secessioner had better not underestimate that. The US is a strong conglomerate that keeps foreign domination out, despite the ****ty Chinese products our corporations sell us for cheap.
To answer the babel of a question specifically, yes, hell, secede. I want officially stop you performing such actions, although the Federal government may.
If you want to form your own country in the interior, say, or in the Pacific Northwest, say, or in the South, say, go for it.
But know this. Passions aside, you would be limiting your industrial and resource base. Further, you're the one who is going to have to work out resource and water rights treaties with the rest of the US/****hole fragmented secessionist country. Good luck with that. States already have a hard enough time doing such things with the Federal government trying to aid.
Further, like I alluded to above, you risk weakening your country endeavor, and turning it into a whorehouse for a European or Asian power to maintain dominance over.
And my last point, which has nothing to do about the legitimacy of secession but has everything to do with the points I mention above. Should someone attempt to secede, it weakens my country in the process. Whether it's mineral, water, or energy resources, shipping lanes or airspace. So I will fight anyone who attempts to weaken my country.
Currently, the US is no where in any shape to warrant what I would consider a legitimate secession (hell, half the secessionists are still in the South, which mooches the most federal money!). Nor do I foresee it being in that kind of shape as long as we all maintain our commitment and our checks and balances.
Despite its flaws, which prove inherent in any system, whether the system be a country's political operative, an engine's cylinders, or a computer's long-term networking capacity, the US is one hell of a system. It's one fine-tuned machine. People on here ***** and moan about everything under the sun, because they're whiners, but the US is a healthy organism overall. Its economy is going to need some health soon, partly due to Southern states mooching off of it without putting enough back in, but it will survive. Its institutional organisms are very strong.
And utopia does not exist. That's fairy tale bull****.
Anyhow, apparently both of you have some question that has something to do with my disaffinity to secession.
Okay.
So, the following about that:
1.The right of a state to secede is a contentious one. It's not nearly as clear-cut as many of you on here typically make it out to be. Post-Civil War rulings have suggested that it's not a right unilaterally, and that a majority of states need to agree to it (which I can abide by, halfway, at least, depending upon context and circumstances).
Now, like I said, this is post-War, so if you want to criticize such rulings for anti-secessionist/anti-Southern bias, then that's fair.
I will remind such critics, however, to be very mindful of capital and geography, two things that often go unnoticed when passions run deep. A) The US was not about to let the Mississippi basin, its source of shipping and agricultural power go; and, B) The South had no actual capital. It was merely a loose confederation of wealthy slave-owners who honestly, despite how bad the Reconstruction South was, would have led us (Southerners, my family included) into serious ****-hole-dom, had they won. I'm glad they didn't.
If you think the South is a bunch of moochers now (which it is, per capita), then you ought have seen the welfare state or chaos/in-fighting bunch of **** it would have turned into had the South one. Without any mineral or energy resources from the interior of the US (which most likely would have been shut off after independence), and with mixed foreign relations as a result, it would most likely have ended up either a failed state or a European whorehouse.
But that's just my educated opinion.
2. Working off that last part, concerning foreign influence, any secessioner had better not underestimate that. The US is a strong conglomerate that keeps foreign domination out, despite the ****ty Chinese products our corporations sell us for cheap.
To answer the babel of a question specifically, yes, hell, secede. I want officially stop you performing such actions, although the Federal government may.
If you want to form your own country in the interior, say, or in the Pacific Northwest, say, or in the South, say, go for it.
But know this. Passions aside, you would be limiting your industrial and resource base. Further, you're the one who is going to have to work out resource and water rights treaties with the rest of the US/****hole fragmented secessionist country. Good luck with that. States already have a hard enough time doing such things with the Federal government trying to aid.
Further, like I alluded to above, you risk weakening your country endeavor, and turning it into a whorehouse for a European or Asian power to maintain dominance over.
And my last point, which has nothing to do about the legitimacy of secession but has everything to do with the points I mention above. Should someone attempt to secede, it weakens my country in the process. Whether it's mineral, water, or energy resources, shipping lanes or airspace. So I will fight anyone who attempts to weaken my country.
Currently, the US is no where in any shape to warrant what I would consider a legitimate secession (hell, half the secessionists are still in the South, which mooches the most federal money!). Nor do I foresee it being in that kind of shape as long as we all maintain our commitment and our checks and balances.
Despite its flaws, which prove inherent in any system, whether the system be a country's political operative, an engine's cylinders, or a computer's long-term networking capacity, the US is one hell of a system. It's one fine-tuned machine. People on here ***** and moan about everything under the sun, because they're whiners, but the US is a healthy organism overall. Its economy is going to need some health soon, partly due to Southern states mooching off of it without putting enough back in, but it will survive. Its institutional organisms are very strong.
And utopia does not exist. That's fairy tale bull****.
Last edited:
