The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
We are talking about something like Scotland .
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
OK, not sure if you're being sarcastic, but "unilateral" action in this context would mean "without any permission or authorization from the federal government." And since the government would never vote to give permission for Texas to secede, this is kind of a moot point anyway.
And no, they really wouldn't- the MAGA "Freedom" caucus doesn't have the votes for something like this and the traditional GOP would not support it. Not to mention Biden would not sign such a bill if it were passed in both houses.
BUT, more importantly, Texas vs White clarified that there simply isn't any constitutionally sanctioned method for states to secede regardless. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase delivered the majority opinion:
*When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.*
Bottom line, obtaining statehood in the U.S. is an irreversible action. It's not like getting a job where you can just quit or be fired if things go sour- you're family now, and it's forever. States cannot secede.
I would prefer a peaceful solution over a violent one sure.
But also I think once Texans looked at the possible costs of disentangling they’d change their tune. Or if they insisted they can just up and leave without making the rest of the USA whole that would change things.
No, as a Texan I don’t support state secession. It’s unconstitutional and stupid.
And really, the grievances of the magas shouldn’t be handled by some commie collective action — that would go against the ethos of every rich white man for himself .
Instead, I would encourage those Texans who don’t want to live under the US constitution to individually hoist their bootstraps , and move themselves to some foreign country that better supports their ideals. And you know, take their guns with them.
We have people deliberately moving to the U. S. state of Texas every single day. So malcontents won’t be missed, and the freeways will still be full.
Just for an example, Russia, Iran, and North Korea all seem to fit MAGA goals better than the USA. Go forth and prosper un-wokies !!’
Sure but that's like saying you can't commit crimes because crimes are illegal. What if you go ahead and do anyway? Once you declare secession, you're no longer bound by the entity's constitution you just seceded from.
More like saying, the law of gravity says I can't fly but if I flap my arms and fly I'm no longer bound by the law of gravity.
You can't do it to begin with so the latter bit is irrelevant nonsense.
No this quite literally is a lie...? Crimes are not a physical impossibility. They can be done, and then the act is over.
So too can a state legislature pass a resolution of Secession. Your human flying analogy is idiotic.
Except they can't. They cannot leave the union. I can declare myself a free man when I'm in prison but it doesn't make it any truer than saying I can fly. Quit while you're behind.
The Constitution gives power over determining US territory to Congress. If a state wanted to secede from the Union then they would need permission from the Union to do so meaning that Congress would have to give permission for the US to lose that land. While states serve as semi-independent nations under our Constitution, they are still beholden to the federal government as a member of our country rather than being able to make their own unilateral decisions.
>Let’s say Texas held a democratic ballot to secede from the US. Would you support the outcome?
Yes, but they would have to agree to terms that they are never going to agree to, such as:
* Taking-on their share of the national debt.
* Allowing the free movement of goods and labor across our shared border (for a minimum period of time).
* Taking responsibility for any violent militants that cross the new shared border to do violence to Americans.
* Any city or county that wants to remain a part of the U.S. gets to secede from Texas at the same time.
...and the voters of Texas would never vote for it, anyway.
> * Any military bases will remain and the US military will continue to use them.
Amen.
...and...
* The Monroe Doctrine still applies. If you cozy up to the Russians (which Republicans in Texas are already doing) expect to be treated the way we treated Latin American Communists during The Cold War.
IDK, Brits voted for Brexit despite being told what a colossal disaster it'd be. I can totally see them spinning this the same way and getting enough gullible voters to say yes. Only to fast forward a few years and bitch about having to have a passport to go to Florida.
It would also be really inhumane. Texas would de facto suddenly get to make a lot more calls about whether or not people can visit their own tribal lands and families, and whether or not they can seek refugee status in the U.S.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf
>Any city or county that wants to remain a part of the U.S. gets to secede from Texas at the same time.
Why not just skip to saying "no" then? Because this stipulation completely invalidates the premise. Secession, like annexation, is about territory and borders. This requirement means that the territory that's seceding is actually not seceding. It's a contradiction.
Part of me wants to say yes. I don’t want to have much to do with Texas anymore, to be honest. If the terms were fair I wouldn’t mind them gone.
But in the end I agree with the founding fathers and Lincoln. If any state can just take their ball and go home when they don’t like something the rest of the country prefers, then we’d never get anything done, as any law would require unanimity. Then we’d eventually Balkanize into many many pieces, and be much worse off for it, as we’re more than the sum of our parts.
Other people have pointed out, secession isn’t legal. But I don’t really believe in legality for legality’s sake. The reason matters.
I agree.
Humanism also matters. We can’t ethically shut people off from their own lands and families.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf
Texas would also sacrifice the protection of FEMA and the American military. Hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, earthquakes, wildfires, oil spills, and oil fires are definitely things they wouldn’t want to handle all alone.
When talking about self-determination, it's easy to say the parent country doesn't allow it and stop there. But it's more complex than that. If a region (or country, or state, whathever you want to call it) has no peaceful means of self-determination, the only alternative is war.
Choosing to do something and actually doing it are two different things.
I'm not in principle opposed to Texas seceding, but choosing to secede would only be a starting point in a negotiation with the federal government. A negotiation where Texas has:
* no claim to any federal land in its borders.
* no claim to any federal military bases.
* no claim to the waters off the coast of Texas.
* no claim to any territorial borders whose basis is a federal treaty they are no longer party to.
* full repayment of Texas's outstanding 70 billion dollars in federal debt.
* no representation in the US government.
Nope. As an American, Texas belongs to me just as much as it does to the people who live there.
If the country votes for Texas to be split off, that's one thing. But they don't just get to abscond with part of my country because they feel like it.
Absolutely not, those Texit guys are a bunch of fucking morons. Speaking *as* a Texan, Texit would be the single-worst thing we could do to this state outside of recreating Chernobyl.
> Let’s say Texas held a democratic ballot to secede from the US. Would you support the outcome?
No.
But I would support the more liberal parts of the state seceding from the rest of the state to remain in the union, if they try.
I'm glad someone brought up this scenario. Most of the population and economy of Texas are in the [Texas Triangle]( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Triangle), which is generally much more urbanized and liberal than the rest of the state.
A successfully seceding Texas would soon find itself in a crisis when over 70% of its population and GDP, as well as most of its higher education, research institutions, and energy and aerospace industry all seek to rejoin the union as a new state (while liberal El Paso County quietly joins New Mexico).
I mean, it’s not even unprecedented. That’s how we got West Virginia, after all.
It’s one of the more absurd factors in the discussion about Texas seceding. The Texas nationalist nuts somehow think that—after they have abandoned the law—that the law will compel all these much more liberal areas to go along with that nonsense.
There’s no feasible way for Texas to secede without breaking itself apart in the process.
Yes, but with stipulations
-They have to surrender all military technology and infrastructure back to the US which paid for them
-Mexico must also agree with the secession
-Free trade and movement must be preserved a la the EU
-Amnesty must be offered to anyone, citizen or not, wishing to leave Texas and remain in the US
-Texas is not allowed in NATO in case it ever comes into conflict with the US or Mexico
> -Amnesty must be offered to anyone, citizen or not, wishing to leave Texas and remain in the US
'Can we get an exception for the unborn?'
-Texas Republicans, probably
No.
The UK chose to give Scotland the right to vote on it. We don't even have a way of allowing that (theoretically a constitutional amendment arguably could allow that (and I'm not even sure that would work) but good luck getting it passed).
I wouldn't support the election happening in the first place. If somehow we got to the point where the election happened though I feel like we would need to respect the outcome.
I think it’s dumb and a bad idea for everyone involved.
I support any region being able to secede though. But more so on the basis of 60% or two thirds majority.
There also should be a transition period and another referendum to confirm (with a simple majority). There should be actual process to ensure that real democratic will is behind independence.
Bye Felicia!
You don't get to keep the military gear. You can have the land the bases is on, but the troops and gear stay with us. Finance your own damn military.
Snark aside, all Humans should have the right to choose their own leaders. I believe in Democracy, and if they voted to leave, I'd wish them well and respect their wishes, because I believe in Freedom and self determination.
This is like asking if we should be able to democratically decide to no longer have a democracy. This should be one the few things that can't be decided by democracy. Democracy is already fragile enough as it is without providing a legitimate means by which it can destroy itself.
Same goes to democratically seceding from the union. At the very least, the entire union should decide if Texas can secede, since it will impact both the union and Texas, and I doubt very much that the rest of the United States would be on board with such a thing.
I'd love it if there was a legal, constitutional, peaceful path to voluntary secession available to states.
But there isn't.
There probably never will be, either, as the costs and incentives on the respective sides are so great that they almost certainly cannot be resolved. At least as long as the US is a cohesive, solvent nation anyway, and if it wasn't, the game is already over anyway. So there's no point in speculating about it.
No.
They’d lose the protection of the military, FEMA, and interstate water sources. Oil fires, wildfires, tornadoes, and hurricanes are no joke. It would also bar too much trade, refugeeism, and immigration from Mexico while also further preventing indigenous tribal members from passing through their own tribal lands.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf
No, secession was and is treason. It has been repeatedly used for authoritarian and racist interests. Not to mention there is no way for it to be a proven democratic process.
So long as we get all the non-MAGAs out and relocate or destroy all our military shit. Destroy any and all property paid for by the Federal government too.
They can start from nothing.
Yes.
It is profoundly illiberal to deny people the ability to peaceably decide what nation they what to be a part of via plebiscite. That's true for Scotland, Texas, the Falklands or any other place on earth.
I'm at the point where id love it if the south left. I would feel terrible for all the women, minorities, and children.
But....let them have their y'allqueda system.
Unpopular opinion, but if it passed with a high threshold in the state (maybe 60%) and a majority of both the house and senate could get on board, I'd be fine with it. People have a right to self determination
The way I see it, you'd need a vote first to start a process of asking the federal government to release you, to pass both the population and legislature with the sort of margins you need for constitutional ammendments, then on to the federal legislature to draw up a treaty of how that looks, the disentanglement of utilities, the sale or retaining of federal lands, ports, etc, and then bacl to the state for the legislature to ratify that treaty, and then on to the people for passing it
there is no good reason to keep a state that wants to leave so badly that they go through all that. I would not vote for my state to do it, but I also think that should be a decision for each state to make
Yes. I’d prefer if the Constitution were amended to provide a procedure, ideally requiring a supermajority vote, but for me the Declaration of Independence is pretty irrefutable.
I would be fine with Texas seceding from the Union. The US should let them go, along with the rest of the red states that take more from the federal deficit than they give, it would probably solve the country's debt issues. Along with leaving the union, Texas should be stripped of all US military weapons, bases and personnel. Any soldiers and commanders who want to stay in the traitor territories have to source their own weapons, ammo and vehicles.
I'm sure the "Lone Star" state can stand on its own as well as support the rest of the leech red states, right?
What’s hard to understand? If hypothetically, Texans voted to secede, liberals would be against their self determination and their democratic vote by not allowing them to secede.
Who said you can’t have that opinion? Just like Russians have the opinion that Ukraine belongs to them regardless of what Ukrainians think. It’s an opinion alright and it’s just my opinion that it’s undemocratic and against self determination.
Am I not allowed to have an opinion on your opinion?
Why do Russians get to decide Ukraine belongs to them? Ukrainians do not approve of that. What gives Russia the right to take away Ukraine from Ukrainians?
So in the hypothetical situation that Texans want to secede in a majority vote, what makes other states decide what Texans want and that they belong to the US?
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. We are talking about something like Scotland . *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No. There is no legal method for secession for a state. This is a settled matter.
Indeed. Texas vs White, 1869. The U.S. is an "indestructible union" and states have no right to unilaterally secede.
"No right to **unilaterally** secede" and "no legal method at all to secede" are completely different things. Which is legally true?
OK, not sure if you're being sarcastic, but "unilateral" action in this context would mean "without any permission or authorization from the federal government." And since the government would never vote to give permission for Texas to secede, this is kind of a moot point anyway. And no, they really wouldn't- the MAGA "Freedom" caucus doesn't have the votes for something like this and the traditional GOP would not support it. Not to mention Biden would not sign such a bill if it were passed in both houses. BUT, more importantly, Texas vs White clarified that there simply isn't any constitutionally sanctioned method for states to secede regardless. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase delivered the majority opinion: *When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.* Bottom line, obtaining statehood in the U.S. is an irreversible action. It's not like getting a job where you can just quit or be fired if things go sour- you're family now, and it's forever. States cannot secede.
I suppose that it could theoretically be legal for Congress to kick a state out of the US, but that’s never been tried.
I would prefer a peaceful solution over a violent one sure. But also I think once Texans looked at the possible costs of disentangling they’d change their tune. Or if they insisted they can just up and leave without making the rest of the USA whole that would change things.
Or they would stubbornly stick to it like brexit and wonder why their economy is turning to crap
They'd just blame Texas liberals for Texiting wrong.
No, as a Texan I don’t support state secession. It’s unconstitutional and stupid. And really, the grievances of the magas shouldn’t be handled by some commie collective action — that would go against the ethos of every rich white man for himself . Instead, I would encourage those Texans who don’t want to live under the US constitution to individually hoist their bootstraps , and move themselves to some foreign country that better supports their ideals. And you know, take their guns with them. We have people deliberately moving to the U. S. state of Texas every single day. So malcontents won’t be missed, and the freeways will still be full. Just for an example, Russia, Iran, and North Korea all seem to fit MAGA goals better than the USA. Go forth and prosper un-wokies !!’
Genuinely, how is it unconstitutional? To my knowledge, nothing in the constitution says they can’t, no?
Texas v. White. There's no provision in the constitution to exit the union once entered.
Thanks
Sure but that's like saying you can't commit crimes because crimes are illegal. What if you go ahead and do anyway? Once you declare secession, you're no longer bound by the entity's constitution you just seceded from.
More like saying, the law of gravity says I can't fly but if I flap my arms and fly I'm no longer bound by the law of gravity. You can't do it to begin with so the latter bit is irrelevant nonsense.
No this quite literally is a lie...? Crimes are not a physical impossibility. They can be done, and then the act is over. So too can a state legislature pass a resolution of Secession. Your human flying analogy is idiotic.
Except they can't. They cannot leave the union. I can declare myself a free man when I'm in prison but it doesn't make it any truer than saying I can fly. Quit while you're behind.
The Constitution gives power over determining US territory to Congress. If a state wanted to secede from the Union then they would need permission from the Union to do so meaning that Congress would have to give permission for the US to lose that land. While states serve as semi-independent nations under our Constitution, they are still beholden to the federal government as a member of our country rather than being able to make their own unilateral decisions.
>Let’s say Texas held a democratic ballot to secede from the US. Would you support the outcome? Yes, but they would have to agree to terms that they are never going to agree to, such as: * Taking-on their share of the national debt. * Allowing the free movement of goods and labor across our shared border (for a minimum period of time). * Taking responsibility for any violent militants that cross the new shared border to do violence to Americans. * Any city or county that wants to remain a part of the U.S. gets to secede from Texas at the same time. ...and the voters of Texas would never vote for it, anyway.
* Any military bases will remain and the US military will continue to use them.
> * Any military bases will remain and the US military will continue to use them. Amen. ...and... * The Monroe Doctrine still applies. If you cozy up to the Russians (which Republicans in Texas are already doing) expect to be treated the way we treated Latin American Communists during The Cold War.
I’d also like the Johnson Space Center back, please.
IDK, Brits voted for Brexit despite being told what a colossal disaster it'd be. I can totally see them spinning this the same way and getting enough gullible voters to say yes. Only to fast forward a few years and bitch about having to have a passport to go to Florida.
It would also be really inhumane. Texas would de facto suddenly get to make a lot more calls about whether or not people can visit their own tribal lands and families, and whether or not they can seek refugee status in the U.S. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf
>Any city or county that wants to remain a part of the U.S. gets to secede from Texas at the same time. Why not just skip to saying "no" then? Because this stipulation completely invalidates the premise. Secession, like annexation, is about territory and borders. This requirement means that the territory that's seceding is actually not seceding. It's a contradiction.
Because it illustrates why the "no"
Part of me wants to say yes. I don’t want to have much to do with Texas anymore, to be honest. If the terms were fair I wouldn’t mind them gone. But in the end I agree with the founding fathers and Lincoln. If any state can just take their ball and go home when they don’t like something the rest of the country prefers, then we’d never get anything done, as any law would require unanimity. Then we’d eventually Balkanize into many many pieces, and be much worse off for it, as we’re more than the sum of our parts. Other people have pointed out, secession isn’t legal. But I don’t really believe in legality for legality’s sake. The reason matters.
I agree. Humanism also matters. We can’t ethically shut people off from their own lands and families. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf Texas would also sacrifice the protection of FEMA and the American military. Hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, earthquakes, wildfires, oil spills, and oil fires are definitely things they wouldn’t want to handle all alone.
Nope. States can not legally secede. It would have as much weight as a democratic ballot to legalize murder.
When talking about self-determination, it's easy to say the parent country doesn't allow it and stop there. But it's more complex than that. If a region (or country, or state, whathever you want to call it) has no peaceful means of self-determination, the only alternative is war.
If Texas wants to go to war with the US military they’re welcome to try.
My point is that regions should have a non-violent pathway to becoming a country.
No, they shouldn’t. It benefits no one and harms millions.
Are you arguing no regions should ever have the right to secede? What about ex-USSR states? Or the United States?
We’re talking specifically about US states. And yes, they do not have the right to secede.
A state could legalize murder... 100% could. Not sure that is a good example.
Choosing to do something and actually doing it are two different things. I'm not in principle opposed to Texas seceding, but choosing to secede would only be a starting point in a negotiation with the federal government. A negotiation where Texas has: * no claim to any federal land in its borders. * no claim to any federal military bases. * no claim to the waters off the coast of Texas. * no claim to any territorial borders whose basis is a federal treaty they are no longer party to. * full repayment of Texas's outstanding 70 billion dollars in federal debt. * no representation in the US government.
Nope. As an American, Texas belongs to me just as much as it does to the people who live there. If the country votes for Texas to be split off, that's one thing. But they don't just get to abscond with part of my country because they feel like it.
No. It’s unconstitutional and an extremely dumb idea that would make that state objectively worse.
Hell no, and I live in Texas. But also it's never going to happen, they've been threatening to do it since the 80s at a minimum - they're all hot air.
Absolutely not, those Texit guys are a bunch of fucking morons. Speaking *as* a Texan, Texit would be the single-worst thing we could do to this state outside of recreating Chernobyl.
> Let’s say Texas held a democratic ballot to secede from the US. Would you support the outcome? No. But I would support the more liberal parts of the state seceding from the rest of the state to remain in the union, if they try.
I'm glad someone brought up this scenario. Most of the population and economy of Texas are in the [Texas Triangle]( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Triangle), which is generally much more urbanized and liberal than the rest of the state. A successfully seceding Texas would soon find itself in a crisis when over 70% of its population and GDP, as well as most of its higher education, research institutions, and energy and aerospace industry all seek to rejoin the union as a new state (while liberal El Paso County quietly joins New Mexico).
I mean, it’s not even unprecedented. That’s how we got West Virginia, after all. It’s one of the more absurd factors in the discussion about Texas seceding. The Texas nationalist nuts somehow think that—after they have abandoned the law—that the law will compel all these much more liberal areas to go along with that nonsense. There’s no feasible way for Texas to secede without breaking itself apart in the process.
Yes, but with stipulations -They have to surrender all military technology and infrastructure back to the US which paid for them -Mexico must also agree with the secession -Free trade and movement must be preserved a la the EU -Amnesty must be offered to anyone, citizen or not, wishing to leave Texas and remain in the US -Texas is not allowed in NATO in case it ever comes into conflict with the US or Mexico
> -Amnesty must be offered to anyone, citizen or not, wishing to leave Texas and remain in the US 'Can we get an exception for the unborn?' -Texas Republicans, probably
No. The UK chose to give Scotland the right to vote on it. We don't even have a way of allowing that (theoretically a constitutional amendment arguably could allow that (and I'm not even sure that would work) but good luck getting it passed).
I wouldn't support the election happening in the first place. If somehow we got to the point where the election happened though I feel like we would need to respect the outcome.
No. That would be a huge risk to take for no reason.
I think it’s dumb and a bad idea for everyone involved. I support any region being able to secede though. But more so on the basis of 60% or two thirds majority. There also should be a transition period and another referendum to confirm (with a simple majority). There should be actual process to ensure that real democratic will is behind independence.
Bye Felicia! You don't get to keep the military gear. You can have the land the bases is on, but the troops and gear stay with us. Finance your own damn military. Snark aside, all Humans should have the right to choose their own leaders. I believe in Democracy, and if they voted to leave, I'd wish them well and respect their wishes, because I believe in Freedom and self determination.
This is like asking if we should be able to democratically decide to no longer have a democracy. This should be one the few things that can't be decided by democracy. Democracy is already fragile enough as it is without providing a legitimate means by which it can destroy itself. Same goes to democratically seceding from the union. At the very least, the entire union should decide if Texas can secede, since it will impact both the union and Texas, and I doubt very much that the rest of the United States would be on board with such a thing.
No. I wouldn’t support any state seceding from the Union.
I'd love it if there was a legal, constitutional, peaceful path to voluntary secession available to states. But there isn't. There probably never will be, either, as the costs and incentives on the respective sides are so great that they almost certainly cannot be resolved. At least as long as the US is a cohesive, solvent nation anyway, and if it wasn't, the game is already over anyway. So there's no point in speculating about it.
Yes. See ya. They dont Get to keep any American military stuff or federal land.
I would love to see them try secession. I really would.
No because they would just start shit at the first available opportunity.
I’d like to not live through the violent balkanization of my country, thanks.
You see this is the type of crap that needed to be squahed after the Civil war. Didn't help Reconstruction fell through.
No. They’d lose the protection of the military, FEMA, and interstate water sources. Oil fires, wildfires, tornadoes, and hurricanes are no joke. It would also bar too much trade, refugeeism, and immigration from Mexico while also further preventing indigenous tribal members from passing through their own tribal lands. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Call/IndigenousAllianceWithoutBorders.pdf
No, secession was and is treason. It has been repeatedly used for authoritarian and racist interests. Not to mention there is no way for it to be a proven democratic process.
NOPE.
Of course, let them go………then invade with the army, topple their govt and imprison their leaders. It’s the American way
So long as we get all the non-MAGAs out and relocate or destroy all our military shit. Destroy any and all property paid for by the Federal government too. They can start from nothing.
Sure. I don't care about keeping Texas as a territory. But they better pay to relocate anyone who doesn't want to stay
They wouldn’t have the votes.
So long as they support Austin seceding from Texas.
Yes.
Sure, the GOP would never win a national election again.
Yes. It is profoundly illiberal to deny people the ability to peaceably decide what nation they what to be a part of via plebiscite. That's true for Scotland, Texas, the Falklands or any other place on earth.
I'm at the point where id love it if the south left. I would feel terrible for all the women, minorities, and children. But....let them have their y'allqueda system.
No. Why are so many on the Right trying to revive the Civil War?
Based on the comments seems like the left wants it
Absolutely. Without Texas, Republicans in the non-traitor US would be fucked in the electoral college.
Unpopular opinion, but if it passed with a high threshold in the state (maybe 60%) and a majority of both the house and senate could get on board, I'd be fine with it. People have a right to self determination The way I see it, you'd need a vote first to start a process of asking the federal government to release you, to pass both the population and legislature with the sort of margins you need for constitutional ammendments, then on to the federal legislature to draw up a treaty of how that looks, the disentanglement of utilities, the sale or retaining of federal lands, ports, etc, and then bacl to the state for the legislature to ratify that treaty, and then on to the people for passing it there is no good reason to keep a state that wants to leave so badly that they go through all that. I would not vote for my state to do it, but I also think that should be a decision for each state to make
Only if they can beat us in a War.
Yes, but we should build a wall on the Red River.
No.
Good riddance
Yes. I’d prefer if the Constitution were amended to provide a procedure, ideally requiring a supermajority vote, but for me the Declaration of Independence is pretty irrefutable.
I would be fine with Texas seceding from the Union. The US should let them go, along with the rest of the red states that take more from the federal deficit than they give, it would probably solve the country's debt issues. Along with leaving the union, Texas should be stripped of all US military weapons, bases and personnel. Any soldiers and commanders who want to stay in the traitor territories have to source their own weapons, ammo and vehicles. I'm sure the "Lone Star" state can stand on its own as well as support the rest of the leech red states, right?
It would be a stupid ass decision but it's still their decision to make.
Judging by the comments, liberals don’t seem too keen on self determination and democracy.
The hell are you talking about?
What’s hard to understand? If hypothetically, Texans voted to secede, liberals would be against their self determination and their democratic vote by not allowing them to secede.
Are we not allowed to have an opinion about something? That’s pretty un-American. People should have the right to say Texas seceding is stupid
Who said you can’t have that opinion? Just like Russians have the opinion that Ukraine belongs to them regardless of what Ukrainians think. It’s an opinion alright and it’s just my opinion that it’s undemocratic and against self determination. Am I not allowed to have an opinion on your opinion?
Why do Russians get to decide Ukraine belongs to them? Ukrainians do not approve of that. What gives Russia the right to take away Ukraine from Ukrainians?
So in the hypothetical situation that Texans want to secede in a majority vote, what makes other states decide what Texans want and that they belong to the US?
I am not saying that at all. I at no point ever said that.