I have a question for you guys on here: Do you think the free state project will be allowed secession? If they are, then this would open the doors for other groups to attempt their own secessions (aztlan)... Do you think our guvmint would allow NH to set such an example? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No. If any state tried to seced, then I would expect the USA to hold the state in the union by force and rule the state with marshal law.
Actually I expect that the discovery that a minority group taking a state free and secedeing would be dealt with harshly by the majority. The feds wouldn't have to do a thing.
Here is what you do: Take all your followers and move to some place with a small population that nobody actually cares about. Like Greenland (which actually has a few halfway nice areas) or Easter Island (where the only thing people care about is those big, stupid Moai). Easter Island only had 3,791 people in 2002 and it is only very loosely controlled by Chile. Greenland, on the other hand, is even more isolated. Only two of all of its cities are actually connected by roads, the seas are often blocked by ice, and air travel is unpredictable. Try and take an American state and you will be branded down as terrorists, hunted down, and killed.
"the free state project" wants libertarians (white anglo presumably) to take over new Hampshire which is already one of the most libertarian states in the nation. The goal is to take the small state government and change it to almost no state government. So what if they succeeded in making New Hampshire into a libertarian paradise and then the people (white anglo) of New Hampshire decided the feds were too oppressive and New Hampshire wanted independence. That is the scenario I think Zen Drake was talking about.
ah thanks.,it would be funny if the us government went throug with it and let them secede and then immediately declared war on them and the terms of surrender were a 10% increase in all taxes for NH for being dumbasses.
I dunno. Now that I think about it, letting one state secede from the union might actually be a good idea. It would be a safety valve for the nation. Throw some propaganda offering their dream life to anyone uncontent to live in regular American society and encourage them to move there. You can even start exiling people there. You would just have to be content with the new berlin wall being built around your borders.
I dunno, ...I suspect that any state that had a majority of voters wanting to secede, they could do so via legal means as provided in the Constitution. I don't think that the USA would or could prevent it. The key to it is ...LEGAL... avenues, NOT violent, armed revolt. Texas considered it at one time and as I recall there was lots of legal opinions, most of which decided that it could be done without too much difficulty. Idaho also considered it at one time with the same/similar opinions. Baron Max
Northern California/Southern Oregon do it too. Heck, they live their lives as if they're another state. They call themselves the State of Jefferson and you'll see/hear it everywhere you go. - N
Yeah, I don't think that the Constitution prevents secession in any way. In fact, it might actually encourage it! I think if any state really wanted to secede, there'd be nothing that the nation could do about it legally. And I don't think that they'd send in the army and marines, either. I'm just guessing, but it's my opinion that in the decades to come, many states will opt to form some type of independence from the federal government. Perhaps not actual secession, but more like a negotiated "freedom". And I think the feds will have no choice but to allow it. Baron Max
i believe that to secede in a legal fashion, the state in question would almost certainly have to recieve the blessings of the surrounding states. if they did not seek this out, the federal government would almost certainly seize the offending state and force it back into the union. thats what history says, anyhow.
On what legal grounds? And that's the point that I've been making ...I don't think there are legal grounds in the Constitution that permit the feds such actions. I also don't see or understand your point about the surrounding states having anything to do with it? Why should some other state have such power over another state? And where is that legally dictated? Well, history "tells" us lots of things, don't it? But that don't make it legal or right or wrong or ethical or whatever. History is just a recording of what humans have done in the past ...and the Earth is littered with the remains of humans who have done some of those things! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Baron Max
Really? If it's legal, then why did the federal government object to the southern states declaring independence? Which led up to the U.S. Civil War???
Well, for the same reason that many such things happen in history ...it was illegal to fight the Civil War, yet they did it anyway! ...LOL! Surely you aren't suggesting that everything that's happened in history has been legal, are you? Baron Max
No, I wasn't looking at the wrong end. The secession was perfectly legal and should have been permitted according to the law. It was illegal for the north, or the "federal government" to use military power to try to stop it. That no one thought to check the Constitution for the legality of it doesn't mean anything ...the Civil War was, in fact, fought! And that's the "history" that you suggested was a good precendent for stopping any future secession ...and it isn't. Baron Max
