Joe Donnelly on California secession

[SmartBomb]

A case for secession based on the notion that fighting to take back America is essentially fighting to take back a myth. What do you do when a nation's people are so divided and DIFFERENT that the idea of common ground seems naive at best?



Leaving Home
In defense of secession
by Joe Donnelly
LA Weekly January 21

Count me among those who woke up on November 3 and thought: secession!

My turn toward the idea that California should secede from the Union was based on some bedrock logic that my father used to admonish me with as he suspiciously eyed my derelict teenage friends: You can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps. That Wednesday morning, I looked at the sea of red in between the coasts and in the South, and I listened to the hypocritical crowing by misogynists and homophobes about values and strength and "the real America" and thought: If these were my friends, I’d try to get new ones.

Since then, when I’ve tried to have rational conversations about secession, I have heard the idea dismissed by those who would call themselves progressive or even radical as "middle-class parlor games" or "not even worth discussing" or, they say, very emotionally, "That’s just plain crazy." I’m a pretty conventional person and an unadventurous thinker myself, and still the radical notion of seceding seems logical, necessary and even inevitable to me. What I want to know, and have yet to hear anyone explain — based on reason and not emotion — is why not secede?

snip

I also keep hearing the plea that "We have to stay and fight." To which, I ask — fight what? The answer I get back is "the right-wing takeover" or "the Republicans" or "for America." But, you know, we had an election and "they" won — somewhat fair and square. And they’ve been winning. I was 4 when Nixon got elected. Think about this country’s leadership since then. Think about the values represented by that leadership. Except for the sad blip of Jimmy Carter, it’s been 36 years of reaction against the better angels of our nature — against Roosevelt, the Kennedys, Dr. King and even LBJ and his Great Society. If you were born in the ’70s, it’s a safe bet that whatever progressive victories you’ve seen in your lifetime were either powered by the last fumes of the ’60s or were local and not national. The only time a Democratic president has been elected since 1980, he was a closet Republican. The next time a Democrat gets elected, he’ll probably be the same. News flash, everybody: The "Republican takeover" is sadly what this country is now and has been for a while. So, are you suggesting taking back the country by force?

More:
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/09/features-donnelly.php

[SmartBomb]

1. Ha, sank as Chevy says "Like A Rock"

single pathetic self-kick

[Cleita]

2. I think liberals should seriously think of blue states

seceeding from the hardcore red states.

[SmartBomb]

3. Obviously a logistical nightmare

but at this point it seems we're pretty much two countries with irreconcilable differences.

[Kitsune]

4. I really have to wonder if any real democracy is possible in the modern US

Mostly because it's so damn large and diverse! If the states held the balance of power, a la the Articles of Confederation, it might work. The problem is, the Federal government holds essentially all the cards. The Federal government has the job of representing a heavily bipolar country.

Theoretically, the Left/Right divide would swing radically back and forth every time one group got 51% of the vote, but it doesn't work that way because the Dems are effectively a wing of the Republicans.

I would be all for the US breaking into at least two, if not several sovereign nations, probably affilliated in a loose confederation for the purposes of national defense and trade and not much else. I really feel that the system of government would work a LOT better if it wasn't being dragged in two vehemently opposing directions at once. I should think that the theologically insane would love it as well, they could have their own little Jesusland that falls completely to pieces through mismanagement while us lefties can finally get our asses caught up to the rest of the industrialized world in terms of social policy.


edit: damn typos >_<

[SmartBomb]

5. Oh man, so true. n/t

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Sounds good, until...

you realize that:

you will need a passport to go to Vegas

almost all oil, gas, and electricity will be imported

you don't own the water in the Colorado River

if you have a home in Beverly Hills and maybe one in New York or Florida, and a ranch in Montana, you have to choose your citizenship

your taxes will go up to pay for the new State Department, military, currency, and whatever US property, like Navy bases and national parks, that California would now own.

[Acryliccalico]

7. Might be worth it in the long run!

:kick:

[Cleita]

8. This is why California can't go it alone.

But adding a few Western States would do the trick. The blue states in the east could do the same. Middle America and the south could have their own Christian, totalitarian, fascist state to themselves. Of course east and west Americas would probably have to give them foreign aid and take in their refugees because their nation will deteriorate rapidly into a banana republic.

[eyepaddle]

9. I live in MN

Could you count us in? Pretty much all the blue states would form a strong rump nation. While we would be lacking in energy sources this is a hurdle that could be overcome.

Maybe we could resettle some blue folks in North Dakota and bring it with--just to reduce the total number of nukes that we'd be turning over to "Jesusland."

On a positive note, Minnesota had been slowly turning pink, if not red, until this most recent election, the republicans absolutley got their asses handed to them! They lost thirteen seats in the house and only hold a two seat majority. The Dems still control the senate, it looks to me like we as a state are coming to our senses.

[SmartBomb]

10. The energy concern is more a reason TO secede than not to

If the effects of peak oil are indeed coming soon, our best option is to break off from the fools and concentrate our resources in a massive alternative energy research and development effort. The red states will ride their dwindling reserves all the way down. Why should we let them take us with them.

[eyepaddle]

11. Exactly,

That's why I spoke of it as a hurdle that can be overcome. I was just a liitle too lazy to type much at the time. And it's good to remember that a lot of the effort to impede research into fuel efficiency/alternative energy come from "red-state" interests.

Western Fuels Association, I'm lookin's at YOU.