Is it time for secession?

Should the United States break up?

  • Yes, individual states have the right to self government

    Votes: 36 54.5%

  • Maybe, but I need to study the question further

    Votes: 17 25.8%

  • No, the US government should use force to keep the States under control

    Votes: 13 19.7%
  • Total voters
    66
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pat H

Moderator
Another thread asked about America's survival, this is a question about whether or not the United States should separate into 4, 5 , or more sovereign nations, autonomous regions, or combination of both.

In my opinion, it's up to each state or region to decide based on their own self interests. The New England states are a natural region, as are the Pacific Northwest, and others.
 
Please clarify. Do you mean secession as in to secede from the United States and become separate countries or do you mean an greater respect for the principle of FEDERALISM as described in the 10th amendment?

"Secession" is to break away from the country and form a new one ala the Civil War which you put in the thread title and OP but the options you gave are questions of Federalism.

Do you intend to ask about secession, give Federalism questions, then use the poll results to claim that secession is a popular desire?
 
We need more states...not less. When did we lose so much confidence in ourselves? We should be annexing Chihuahua, Mexico and Alberta, Canada and then some. Heck, they're all here anyways. Might as well build up those places and give them the benefit of a working (semi) government.
 
That poll is rather leading, y'think? :rolleyes:

There's not "no, I think it's a stupid idea because no one state has enough raw materials, manufacturing, infrastructure and other necessary things to go it alone".
 
The 3 options, if they were to follow the title and OP should be something like:

-Yes, States should be able to separate from the United States and form new Countries.

-Maybe, but I need to study the question further

-No, States should not be permitted to separate from the United States and form new Countries.

The way it is set up is leading and doesn't actually give options to answer the thread title and OP. To answer 'no' forces an involuntary agreement of using force to control a State.

I vote for revising the options to honestly reflect the question in the thread title and OP. Feel free to cut and paste if you vote the same.
 
Greater separation of power, containment of the central government, and erase the socialist experiments of FDR and LBJ and you don't need secession. However, if some heavily populated areas want to continue to run the rest of us into the ground we should be able to distance ourselves from their desired course of ruin. For some reason California and New York insist on telling Virginia, Iowa, and Alabama what to do--that shouldn't happen. Peaceful and separate coexistance should be allowed. Commerce could still happen exactly as it does now, just without all the stupid meddling.
 
It didn't work the first time because the bigger party simply couldn't stomach the idea of having someone tell them "no." Control was and is the only goal. The difference between a revolution and a civil war is only in who wins.
 
no one state has enough raw materials, manufacturing, infrastructure and other necessary things to go it alone".
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Texas does.

In fact if you combine Tx and La they would make a real nice country.
 
In a word---NO.

Not meaning to point fingers, but why is everyone so quick to think of the hardest and most dangerous method?

We can't even get enough people together to vote! Look at us--some here will back a candidate by voting when that candidate doesn't have a snowball's chance of being elected.

We also let the same politicians stay in office and cry about what is happening.

Two observations:

1. If we, as gun owners and Americans, backed ONE candidate, we could elect ANYONE into office.

2. The Constitution of the United States provides three remedies for this situation--the petition, referendum, and the recall.

Let's get together, and use the BALLOT box, shall we?
 
Interesting question. I had to vote maybe, because I believe the states have a right to leave (free association), but I don't think it is necessary at this time. You may consider joining the Free State Project as a viable and possible shot at freedom. Their idea is the next best option to secession. www.freestateproject.org .


Go Ron Paul!!!
 
In fact if you combine Tx and La they would make a real nice third world country.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you.

And you'd get a military and military equipment from...where? And replacement parts as oil rigs wear out from...where? And power that comes from out of state now through which agreements? You'd find yourself on a short leash real quick, and corruption spreading through the government real quick. It'd probably look like one of the banana republics to the south pretty darned fast.

The remaining states could also bring it to its knees with an embargo on air conditioners and air conditioner parts. ;)
 
A somewhat a student of History I've notice that things started "going to hell in a handbasket" right after the War of Northern Aggression. Right around 1865, after the Feds stopped the South from standing up for States Rights the government started to push it weight around by passing all kind of Unjust and Unconstitutional laws designed to keeps States in their place. Many of the Anti-Gun laws came about in Southern States during this time and of course we really see the Feds show their hand with Proibition and later the GCA of '34.
I personally think that Fed Government should concern it's self with things Out Side the country(treaties, tariffs, Forgine Governments, ect.) and let the States take care of things here at home. JMHO, YMMV.
 
Please clarify. Do you mean secession as in to secede from the United States and become separate countries or do you mean an greater respect for the principle of FEDERALISM as described in the 10th amendment?

"Secession" is to break away from the country and form a new one ala the Civil War which you put in the thread title and OP but the options you gave are questions of Federalism.
Click to expand...
The question is about secession, not federalism, which is an entirely separate topic.

There is no part of the US Constitution that prohibits secession, so it remains entirely legal. This is not a solicitation for nuts and bolts questions, such as the typical, "what about the national debt." Secession does not mean that all, or even any, trade would cease among the various new countries formed.

The New England states considered secession at the time of the War of 1812, feeling that there best interests weren't being served in Washington. Further, secession(s) to form say four new countries would allow each to develop their culture without interference from a overweening centralized state, as is the case today.

Those are just a few of my thoughts, I'm sure there are reasons one could think of on both sides of this discussion. I like to hear more.

The union must be preserved
Click to expand...
Why?
 
There's not "no, I think it's a stupid idea because no one state has enough raw materials, manufacturing, infrastructure and other necessary things to go it alone".
Click to expand...

Neither does Singapore. They're doing pretty well. In this day and age, mental resources trump physical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top