Posted on 05/20/2017 6:27:04 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The big problem would be the servers currently hosting Free Republic are located in California. We would have to send in the Marines and pull that hardware out.
And maybe rescue the handful of Constitutionalists left in that state.
Really? 45%? I had no idea it would be that much!
“Mexico would simply walk in, flood the state with its loyal and ethic population and anext it with barely a fight.”
You do realize that that has already happened here, right?
“I’m not sure every state would do that. I could see it splitting along ideological lines, more into regions, like Pacific states, New England, the South, the Midwest and perhaps the rockies.
Given the ideological chasm that exists today we may have reached a point where a split up is probably a good thing.”
It depends upon what your asking them to do. More Federalism under the Constitution of 1787. There is broad support among republicans and conservative states for that.
Separate nations? That is still a minority in most states, if it came to that I don’t see the rocky mountain states spiting off from the South to become a land locked country.
Nor do I see them joining the increasingly fascist west coast states. Say what you will about the south, but at least they have historically and consistently respected your right to govern yourselves internally. The Leftist urban dominated states can’t resist the totalitarian urge to tell you what health care you must buy, what you must eat, how to uses your land, and how much exercise you must get. Their leader(AKA judges) are furthermore completely lawless. There is no constitution possible but that at the case by case discretion of their oligarchs in black robes.
You would be insane to want to share a lawless union dominated by them. The south might have a few cherry picked and checkered domestic policy history but at least they have a mostly consistent track record of leaving other regions alone while sticking to their own laws.
Yep. And I want to keep my national parks and forests and other federal lands if/when the Calexiters exit.
“Yep. And I want to keep my national parks and forests and other federal lands if/when the Calexiters exit.”
They ain’t yours, California can and should pay for the land. But we ain’t got a right to claim solverty over land we simply own but don’t live on or near.
That defis the most basic printable of self government that the sovereignty of any given land belongs to the people who live there.
To say otherwise would let distant California rule Chicago with whatever ridicules rules they might choose never having to live under them in Illinois.
I hope you're right. But California's demographics have been so damaged by 30+ years of reckless immigration policy that there aren't enough people who cherish what California used to be, or aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary to suceed.
I vote yes.
Do I need a ID?
Not going to go anywhere. CA has three issue that they can’t overcome in the short run. Water, power and a Rat majority in Sacramento.
5.56mm
"The 1,440-mile-long Colorado River passes through parts of seven states, several Indian reservations and the Republic of Mexico. California is entitled to 4.4 million acre-feet of water annually from river. Most of that water irrigates crops in the Palo Verde, Imperial and Coachella valleys, located in the southeastern corner of the state, but the Colorado also is a vital source of water for urban southern California. Urban supplies are distributed by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California through its Colorado River Aqueduct."
Like I said why be bellicose over water rights? Just negotiate a water treaty and be done with it like civilized people would do.
The can have it. Lock, stock and barrel.
“How many businesses would remain in California after the split? “
Thousands have already gone thanks to decades of one of the most business hostile state gov’ts in the country.
Aerospace was driven out. Any manufacturing that the AQMD deemed a polluter was driven out.
Given the ideological chasm that exists today we may have reached a point where a split up is probably a good thing.
Lots of people could end up moving. I could see many conservative people who find themselves in a newly independent liberal country, out of what used to be America, moving to the conservative side. Conservatives would move out of New England and California, for example.
“You do realize that that has already happened here, right?”
Yes, i lived in California for a time, I’ve seen it first hand.
The problem is California liberals have screwed over the entire state and the nation with corrupt presidents and corrupt judges. Who have permitted theses invaders to take down roots in the state and refused to assimilate them.
This is going to cost California its identity and freedom as it already has. Unfortunately there is probably nothing anyone can do about that while California is in the union.
Leftist are not going to realize the folly of their ways until they have resent and disastrous history to make them disown it, and blame it all on conservatives.
California is already that basket case. Right now the best thing that could possibly happen to California politically is for her to get what she wants, the ability to go all the way so that she might burn down completely and come back in a generation or two when her kids and Grandkids realize how stupid the present generation was.
If we can do that in a controlled way by keeping her in the union and unable to keep good people like you as slaves we should. But frankly as a non-Californian and recolonizing the enormous threat California’s political power poses to my freedom until that happens, as well as the natural rights of all people to self-government.
I’m not going to object to her leaving as long as good people like you can leave California before she does.
We are like Quisling/Vichy occupied territory here (if Quisling and the Vichy were Mexican socialists) and instead of helping out our brave fellow freepers are eager to throw us to the wolves.
They can and probably should move to Texas, or Arizona.
Well said.
Of course a large part of our disaster is thanks to that amnesty loving dimwit Dubya and his leftwing No Borders Democrat comrades. The only thing wrong with the country is that they haven’t completely replaced the old native American stock with foreign imports.
Keep importing hordes of the 3rd world legally as well as illegally and your states will be the next Californias.
It will be even better for us. The good and decent people will move to USA and the weirdo libs will bolt for Cali.
So will the illegals
Hasta lavista, Baybee
I am guessing that an “independent” California would soon become part of Mexico. The demographics point in that direction, thanks to many years of almost unchecked illegal immigration. The white liberals would immediately let in everyone from the south even more so than now, make them “citizens” and give them the vote. Very soon, California would be completely run by the Mexican drug cartels. Imagine the most violent parts of Mexico. Now imagine this multiplied several times and brought to California as the drug cartels fight each other for new turf and loot everything thay can and fight any native Californians who might still be there who resist the invasion. Most whites, blacks and Asians will be forced to flee, kind of like Zimbabwe forced whites out or killed them. Most of the California exiles would wind up in the U.S. and they will vote and most of them will have learned nothing from their experiment with socialism and multiculturalism.
Although I believe secession to be unconstitutional, I'll play along on this thought exercise.
Regarding the law, if California secedes, naturally all federal laws will cease to apply. That means no Bill of Rights, no social security, no veterans administration, no treaty enforcement, etc. California will have to start fresh with applying to the United Nations, signing the Geneva Convention accords, and other international agreements that cover travel safe harbor, extradition, financial transfers, trade, etc. One has to assume that none of these things signed by the United States descends to an independent California.
Regarding state law, would the California state constitution still be valid, as California is no longer a state? Many laws were written to coexist within the federal framework that no longer applies; there may be huge gaps in the applicability of the existing set of laws. Also, if existing state law becomes nullified too, there will be a period of chaos while new government is formed, new laws are passed, etc.
I don't think things can legally be the same, just independently.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.