No.13
Should Texas secede and form its own nation? If so, how do you think it could be practically done? How would the government work?
No.14
>Should Texas secede and form its own nation?
I'm not sure if Texas should secede or not, but I feel that the admittedly flawed Texas State government is more likely to act in my best interests than the federal government.
>If so, how do you think it could be practically done?
As for practicality, the only way Texas (or any other state) might secede is in the face of national disaster. There would have to be pretty harsh economic downturn coupled with open disdain for the federal government.
>How would the government work?
Probably much the same way it works now. Not well, but too underfunded to do anything terrible. I can see the Catholic Church and the Baptists getting into a charity pissing contest once the federal safety net is withdrawn. Of course, the transition would unlikely be a clean one, so it's hard to say. The path to secession requires crossing an event horizon such that it may result in a militia junta, monarchy, or any number of bizarre alternatives.
No.17
>Should Texas secede and form its own nation?I want it to, but I know that without the dollar as our currency, we'd likely be committing economic suicide. We have to start putting ourselves into the position to [theoretically] break cleanly while still maintaining a profitable government.
so yes, eventually.
>If so, how do you think it could be practically done?After a huge national disaster. either katrina 2: electric boogaloo, or a second great depression.
>How would the government work?Preferably not at all.
What I mean by that is I'd like to see something similar to the US under the Articles of Confederation. Something that upholds the rights of the States in addition to the people. Where the only thing each branch of government can agree on is that they hate each other.
Though in reality it'd likely be exactly as it is now.
Maybe we can convince Rand to move in with his dad here, and start the Paul Dynasty.
>>14>I feel that the admittedly flawed Texas State government is more likely to act in my best interests than the federal government. Same, but our government is still admittedly flawed as you said. and in the long run we'd not really be any better off. In fact its possible we'd be going into a worse situation depending upon who our governor/president is at the time. As much as I loved Perry, a republic under his administration would be horrible. Same goes for a majority of our past governors actually.
We kinda suck at picking people to lead our state.
No.80
I think the government would work better. Washington cant get a good perspective of how their policies affect the governed. If Texas was independent and the people weren't happy they could march to the government buildings and give them a scare for sure.
No.81
1,000 angry Texans if your in Washington is nothing but if your witnessing it you cant help but feel an impact.
No.117
>>13Texas isn't able to, but doesn't need to.
The Texas Constitution states (in Article 1, Section 1) that "Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States…" (note that it does not state "…subject to the President of the United States…" or "…subject to the Congress of the United States…" or "…subject to the collective will of one or more of the other States…")
No.123
>>117Can't Texas just fuck off of the States the same way it integrated? I'm not murican but I remember that Texas was a country before joining into the US.
No.124
>>123Thanks to the U.S supreme court, no they cannot. Texas can legally split into 5 states
I think but it can't legally secede.
No.127
>>123If I recall correctly, the Texas constitution has (or at least had) a provision for us to leave the Union; however, that provision was not recognized by the federal government when we joined, and most certainly isn't recognized since the confederacy lost the Civil War, thereby failing to protect the rights of the federation's constituent states. Because of this, the federal government would require an incredible amount of incentive to allow Texas to leave the Union. Which, is of course, a bit silly. If the USA were genuinely based on the principles of self-determination and government-by-consent, then people would be free to withdraw their consent from the federal government.
That said, because we have a very different political and social environment compared with the situation before the Civil War, a secession movement has the potential to actually work.
From a historical perspective, the Union is in a weaker position, having likely already reached its apex. Furthermore, I don't think that the American people would be as keen to response to a secession movement with warfare. We saw incredibly large (albeit ineffectual) protests against the Middle East wars, so I imagine the backlash against fighting people here would be even larger. If nothing else, the most hawkish Americans are also individuals who would likely be sympathetic to Texas. Militia men from across the Midwest would pour into the region to fight against the federal government, or potentially provide support by harassing targets which the Texan Independence Army wouldn't have access to. Texas may even be able to count on support from across the Rio Grande, as Texas secession would be seen as a "fuck you!" to the American government and it'd likely make drug trafficking into the US easier.
Meanwhile, foreign powers would be heavily inclined to back any separatist movements within the United States. There are very powerful individuals who resent American political power abroad, and these individuals realize that the best way to diminish the political hegemony of the USA is to stir up shit domestically. So, if a secession movement picked up in earnest tomorrow, we'd see various heads of state and media moguls providing support. We all know that Russia would be willing to provide artillery and other armaments if the secession movement escalated to violence, while other nations try to press the federal government diplomatically. It helps that international law regarding separatist movements could be interpreted in Texas's favor, as we have precedent of conflict with the federal government and of being a sovereign state.
No.137
>>13
>Should Texas secede and form its own nation? If so, how do you think it could be practically done? How would the government work?
Give it back to >>>/mexico/
No.138
>>137
Fuck that. Give mexico back to >>>/spain/
No.157
>>13
I would only be in favor of secession if things got really bad. Since the federal government is still (for the most part) keeping a lid on things and giving us that safety net, reforming the Republic of Texas would just mean that Washington comes and kicks our shit in. Sooner or later, they won't be able to adequately provide for the states, which is the point where we'd be better off on our own.
Everyone say hi to the NSA.
No.158
No.160
>>127
>It helps that international law regarding separatist movements could be interpreted in Texas's favor
While you are right, what international law saws wouldn't matter that much since burgerland has so much power on the international stage. The only reason that route to liberty might work is because countries like Russia and China would side with us, and even then there'd probably be bloodshed. Although taking into account all the other factors, we would still have a pretty good chance of succeeding if we actually tried to become an independant country which I do not in any way, shape, or form advocate given the current state of affairs. Pls no partyvan.
No.161
>>160
Let's be honest, though. The United States has been suffering from diminished prestige since the end of the Cold War. The world abroad no longer sees us in the light of post-WW2 liberation propaganda, and the amount of real power the US has on the international state is waning. China and Russia have a sizable power bloc of nations whose cooperation hinges on opposing US hegemony, and they would love to see the US cut down by its own democratic rhetoric. Even our allies in the EU would probably enjoy seeing the taller lily cut down.
The United States would find itself in the position of choosing between backing down to acknowledge peaceful secession or find itself fighting a guerrilla war on its own turf while foreign powers line up to covertly arm the rebels. Either way, additional secession movements would come out of the woodwork.
No.165
If Texas seceded I'd no joke move there tomorrow. I'd rock and roll with you fellas all night.
No.170
>>161
While this country's influence is waning, it's still there for the time being.
>Either way, additional secession movements would come out of the woodwork
This is pretty spot on. Which state do you guys think would be next?
No.171
>>170
I hear Alaska has a sizable secession movement. Deseret and Cascadia are also possibilities, but the most obvious option would be the ghost of the confederacy. The South shall rise again, and all that. Alternatively, the black nationalists may come out of left field with territorial demands.
No.172
And what would Mexico be doing during all this? The feds would definitely be pressuring them to help keep us down, but they probably want to see clapistan get taken down a peg. One anon already suggested that the cartels might lend us a hand in order to stir shit up and make it easier to get drugs into the US, but what about the government?
A lot of the talk about who might support a Texan independance movement is probably just wistful thinking, but D.C. would have their hands full if even half of it turned out to be true.
No.176
Texas needs to secede back to Mexico.
No.179
>>172
Mexico would no doubt try a power grab but it wouldn't do so in Texas. Probably in a weaker state like newmexico.
Truthfully, secession is a fucking retarded idea. It would anally devestate our industrial base. This isn't the fucking 1800's anymore. Companies can and will get the fuck out of dodge.
No.180
>>179
Which is why we need to wait until the government is too weak and defanged to say no (or at least until coming and kicking our shit in is more trouble than it's worth).
No.181
>>179
I don't think that secession would be as economically detrimental as you're implying. We have one of the stronger state economies and access to the sea. It's not like companies these days possess a sense of nationalist patriotism, so I don't think we have too much to worry about when it comes to corporations leaving.
The only thing that would cause the companies to leave would be widespread violence, and if that were the case we would have more immediate concerns than companies fleeing.
>>180
This it what it boils down to.
History tells us well the fate of empires, and we must prepare for the inevitable collapse of our current government. At present, the powers that be are able to maintain the status quo, but this will not last. The growing domestic disorder and the lack of respect shown by foreign governments are a testament to the waning of our civilization.
So should Texas wane with the Union? Or should Texas outlast the Union, possibly to surpass it?
No.192
>>181
>It's not like companies these days possess a sense of nationalist patriotism, so I don't think we have too much to worry about when it comes to corporations leaving.
That's exactly my point. They will leave Texas at the drop of a hat if things started getting out of hand.
The only way I see them staying is that if/when Texas decides to do the big nasty Texas crushes absolutely everything that questions its legitimacy as an independent actor. Without mercy or fail.
That way stability is preserved.
>Or should Texas outlast the Union, possibly to surpass it?
It's not a matter of should or should not. In 20 years Texas may be split in two. If anything we should fear that if ever Texas tries a mad dash for freedom they will balkanize us and then proceed to culturally change what was once texas. One side for the south, one for the midwest, one to mexican culture, and the other into an eastern liberal state as is typical of states with access to water.
No.199
I don't see texas seceding, because the only way it could do so would be bitter and violently. We don't have enough [non drought stricken] land to farm our own food, and the US might strong-arm mexico if it offered assistance (if mexico didn't try to make a land grab themselves). I also don't think there's near enough infrastructure or military power here to pull it off, washington would just drone the fuck outta us.
Also how would texas deal with people who wanted to leave? I don't like texas as it is, but I certainly wouldn't want to live in a texas without constitution and supreme court protection. I could see the religious pseudo-liberterian right taking over (like muslim brotherhood in egypt) and turning texas into a barren waste land. State imposed religion wouldn't surprise me. Old shit that most people think have gone away would return: jim crow laws, sodomy laws, etc. We'd dig up all our oil as quickly and dirtily as possible via fracking, killing the already dry environment and poisoning our groundwater (cuz environmentalism is for pussy liberals, right?). I really just don't have much faith in the texan people*, they seem like the kind of people who'd just fucking snap and turn into animals.
*people who'd fight to be "proud texans", not necessarily everyone who lives in texas
No.201
>>199
See >>180 for how to avoid a violent and costly war.
No.205
>>199
> I don't like texas as it is,
Then leave.
>but I certainly wouldn't want to live in a texas without constitution and supreme court protection. I could see the religious pseudo-liberterian right taking over (like muslim brotherhood in egypt) and turning texas into a barren waste land. State imposed religion wouldn't surprise me. Old shit that most people think have gone away would return: jim crow laws, sodomy laws, etc. We'd dig up all our oil as quickly and dirtily as possible via fracking, killing the already dry environment and poisoning our groundwater (cuz environmentalism is for pussy liberals, right?). I really just don't have much faith in the texan people*, they seem like the kind of people who'd just fucking snap and turn into animals.
What is this shit? Are you really that delusional?
Texan secession means, very simply, that Texas should be sovereign over its own interests and that Texans should not be entangled in Washington's wars.
It does not mean jim crow or state religion. It most certainly does not mean abandoning the the ideals contained within the Bill of Rights.
P.S. Environmentalism is not for pussy liberals. Pussy liberals take whatever their commissar gives them. Environmentalism is for people who like hunting and want their great-grandchild to enjoy the hobby as well. Environmentalism is for people who appreciate the serene, natural beauty of the Texan countryside.
No.207
Yeah, why not? for starters most north-east states are going fucking bankrupt with all industry being china and shit
Then you have the midwest and deep south which have always been and will always be nothing, why let the feds take from your taxes to keep those deadbeats alive?
And then there's the west coast……….CANCER, nuff said
I vote for the Republic of Texas
No.208
If Texas secedes, can I immigrate?
No.209
>>208
Depends, where do you live?
No.210
>>209
The People's Republic of Maryland
No.211
>>210
ehh, as long as you don't vote for higher taxes or gun control I guess you can.
No.212
>>211
I would never dream of doing so
No.214
>>208
>>210
As long as you don't act like a faggot, you could be from Commiefornia for all I care.
No.252
Once the US starts going full commie, Texas will have no choice but to secede in order for us to maintain our freedom of speech and 2nd amendment rights. Then we can stop worrying about stupid Yankee shit and start genociding/deporting any libshits within our borders, starting with Austin. And even if the Yankees want to fight to us to try to incorporate us back into the union, their armies of limpwristed cowardly SJWs will be no match against our armed populace of proud, courageous Texans. It'll be like Vietnam pt. II
I can't fucking wait
No.256
>>252
We should at least give any hipsters in the state a GTFO grace period before we start the crackdown, but I'm partly saying this because I have family in austin.
No.257
>>256
>having family in Austin
Kill Yourself
I have family there too
No.260
>>257
I was born in Austin. We need to cleanse that city.
No.266
Nigger I live in Austin but I'm conservative as shit. Life for me is just constant rage. We should have a system that verifies whether or not someone voted liberal in the previous elections, and whoever did needs to GTFO
No.269
>>266
Actually forcing people to leave at gunpoint would reflect poorly on Texas, but the government footing the bill for anyone wanting to leave would definitely encourage austinite faggots to go and stay go while still showcasing southern hospitality.
No.270
>>252
The viet cong actually suffered even heavier losses than us and the only reason they won is because public support was really low. It probably would be comparable to the vietnam war, but that's not a good thing.
No.297
So how long would Uncle Sam be calling us a "dangerous rogue state" after we break off? I'm thinking a few years, at the very least.
No.300
>>297
If Texas were able to successfully break away, Uncle Sam wouldn't be left in a position to declare much of anything.
No.301
>>300
They could declare all they want. Actually backing those words up would be another story.
No.314
No.352
http://strawpoll.me/4793624
It's a question that needs to be asked, especially since our BO also owns >>>/confederate/.
No.353
>>352
I think that Texas's interests would be better served as an independent republic; however, every potential ally should be welcomed.
Even if Texas were capable of defeating the rest of Union in an open conflict, being part of a larger secession movement would have the beneficial effect of lessening the toll of the war on Texan infrastructure. There's no need to make a war any harder than it has to be.
No.354
>>353
If Texas joined the new confederate states, we would have a lot more autonomy than we currently have.
No.355
>>13
Yes, we Texans are being brought down by the union.
No.368
No.370
>>127
>Furthermore, I don't think that the American people would be as keen to response to a secession movement with warfare.
I don't disagree with the rest of your points, but I merely find it humorous that you say that when I've seen several Commiefornians react to recent Texas politics (like that whole business with Ken Paxton saying it's fine to not hand out marriage licenses to same sex couples if you don't want to) through mocking via "What are they gonna do? Try to secede?" followed with "I hope the United States PUNISHES them if they do! Send the armies in!". Quite a few from what I've seen have made it clear that they want our blood if we ever did secede.
But who the fuck cares about a bunch of whiny Commiefornia babbies, especially when they're the same bunch of shits who rave about how America should crash and burn?
No.373
>>370
Rump ravaged Commiefornians=!majority of the population
Assblasted cali babbies=!soldiers
No.375
>>373
Hence why I added that last line to my post.
>But who the fuck cares about a bunch of whiny Commiefornia babbies, especially when they're the same bunch of shits who rave about how America should crash and burn?
No.388
No.439
>>>/k/196367
Not entirely relevant at first, but then >>>/k/207303 shows up and tells stories about some war games he did when he was in the military.