American states so far alienated by far-flung overlords should be given the same right.

See, this is what most people (Especially on the left) don't seem to understand about the modern call for secession. It's not because an African American was elected president, only a very small minority of racists actually cared about that part. The problem is this: The right-wing side of the political spectrum is getting more and more alienated and marginalized. Especially on social issues.

Personally I'm against any idea of secession. However, I understand quite well where the sentiment is coming from. If the U.S continues to tilt heavily to one side the whole ship is eventually going to tip over and sink.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:30:02

The problem is this: The right-wing side of the political spectrum is getting more and more alienated and marginalized. Especially on social issues.

Yeah... that's the reason y'all gave last time too. "Oh no we're not going to get our way anymore when it comes to social issues like slavery! Time to exit the Union!"

No. Fuck you. You don't get to do that. Most of your conservative shitholes are net receivers of tax money. You also have a shitload of military installations belonging to the federal government. It's like a psycho girlfriend breaking up with you and keeping the house she didn't fucking pay for.


But you do realize that the US is majority conservative, right? Until the old people die, of course, but even then conservatives have a much higher turnout, and have their votes inflated in most states thanks to gerrymandering.

Look, you can't tell me that the conservative side is being marginalized when you control the majority of state-level legislatures, governorships, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme fucking Court.

You guys are just being little bitches because you can't have your way all the time. Great- you know what that's called? A FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

Mostly, they were just middle class/poor white guys. They might have owned a farm or two. But that's it.

If the slaves were freed, they'd lose their jobs. You can see how one would be motivated to fight to the death when your living is at stake.

Yeah, I mean there were obviously economic reasons. "Hmm... my job... or the individual rights and persoonhood of another human being?"

Still an incredibly fucked up thing to do. But we're doing the same thing today:

"Hmm... my cheap T-shirt... or the individual rights and personhood of an exploited third-world child laborer?"

Yeah, fuck that.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:44:52

Typical response from your type knyte. Just start screaming out curse words and insults because you don't know how to actually be civil.

Yeah... that's the reason y'all gave last time too. "Oh no we're not going to get our way anymore when it comes to social issues like slavery! Time to exit the Union!"

This is different. The conservatives at that time were in the wrong. However, this is a different time with different issues. Also did you skip over the part where I said I don't personally support secession?

Oh, and who is "y'all"? My state stayed with the Union last time.

No. Fuck you. You don't get to do that. Most of your conservative shitholes are net receivers of tax money.

This is the exact kind of sentiment that's stirring up these modern secessionists. ALL they hear from your side is "Fuck you". If you treat a group with nothing but contempt for long enough they'll eventually feel nothing but the same for you.

But you do realize that the US is majority conservative, right?

If that's true then it only further validates what I said. The U.S is supposed to be majority rule. A lot of the major decisions that have happened recently have been about as liberal as you get. So Conservative majority plus liberal policies can only mean that we're actually experiencing minority rule. Which is cause to get riled up.

when you control the majority of state-level legislatures, governorships, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme fucking Court.

Control the Supreme Court? Hardly. The Supreme Court is the reason why liberals are gaining ground on every front despite the conservative control in other sectors of government. Can't do anything if SCOTUS will just overrule you at the drop of a hat.

You guys are just being little bitches because you can't have your way all the time. Great- you know what that's called? A FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

I have to wonder if you'd have the same attitude were the situation flipped.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:57:03

Typical response from your type knyte. Just start screaming out curse words and insults because you don't know how to actually be civil.

It was responsive. I didn't intend to be civil. If that bothers you, go ahead and discard the responsive parts too.

This is different. The conservatives at that time were in the wrong. However, this is a different time with different issues. Also did you skip over the part where I said I don't personally support secession?

Advocating for the denial of rights to a minority is also wrong.

I understand that you don't support secession. However, you keep defending those viewpoints so that's what I'm responding to.

Oh, and who is "y'all"? My state stayed with the Union last time.

Mine didn't. :P Best 5 years of Texas history- hyperinflation, losing tens of thousands of people, illegal state-sponsored execution of Unionists who lived on Texan soil, and about 70 years of being a backwater shithole after that (until no less than FDR bailed us out during WWII by building military installations primarily in the South). Pretty solid, eh?

If that's true then it only further validates what I said. The U.S is supposed to be majority rule. A lot of the major decisions that have happened recently have been about as liberal as you get. So Conservative majority plus liberal policies can only mean that we're actually experiencing minority rule. Which is cause to get riled up.

And it is. But you don't win all the time. Moreover, American democracy is bounded by civil rights. You can't simply vote to violate a civil right.

It's not "liberal rule" when the president has to use executive actions to implement any policy and where Congress can't pass anything liberal. Moreover, whenever something liberal does get passed, it's now ignored by the states. I don't think you've been to a Southern/conservative state recently- policies like prison privatization, school vouchers for religious schools, creationism being taught in school, historical revisionism, union-busting, etc., have been incredibly conservative ones implemented in the near past.

The Supreme Court, again, is not supposed to be implementing what the majority of Americans want but rather limiting democratic behavior based on the Constitution- i.e., telling us when we've done something unconstitutional. Their decisions can't be used to determine whether the US is under minority rule, but even then the SCOTUS's biggest cases- Hobby Lobby and Citizens United sided with conservative views.

Control the Supreme Court? Hardly. The Supreme Court is the reason why liberals are gaining ground on every front despite the conservative control in other sectors of government. Can't do anything if SCOTUS will just overrule you at the drop of a hat.

5 of the 9 justices are conservative and were appointed by conservative presidents. They're also the 5 that supported Hobby Lobby and Citizens United, which likely wouldn't have happened had there been 1 more liberal justice.

I think you've missed the biggest cases of the Roberts Court and instead have been looking at the tiny ones about social issues. Ironically, you were the one claiming in another thread that people can't seem to focus on more than social issues- maybe it only seems like that to you because you're so interested in social issues to the tune of ignoring Hobby Lobby/CU and virtually every SCOTUS decision beyond this one, King v. Burwell, and the other Obamacare one with the individual mandate.

I have to wonder if you'd have the same attitude were the situation flipped.

I do. I'm a socialist; I'm probably not going to be living in a socialist society within the span of my lifetime. I've had my Congressional Rep tell me that he wants to kill 100 million people (Iran + North Korea) without provocation- a policy I find odious and imperialist, but has massive support in the United States. This country also frequently violates human rights in the War on Terror. I disagree with most of its actions and wish it were replaced by a less imperialistic and capitalistic government- which, again, I will probably not live to see happen.

But I still live here, and I oppose secession (even of a small socialist commune). I'm not going on the forums of a site where people play online Risk to complain about these policies.

Edited 6/27/2015 05:36:26

Come on Eklipse, it's over. You lost :/

Knyte, your liberal viewpoint obscures historical fact.

While we're taking about the supreme court, let's not that they viewed slaves as property and not people. So, you say that a job is less important than another person, but they were in fact not a person.

Your modern day sweatshop example is so ignorant that it constipates me. People work at sweatshops because it's the only job they have that isn't simply awful work and little pay. It may not be the best quality, or very safe, but it's just an economic phase all nations have gone through. Look at China and south Korea. These nations are better off for it.

Put simply, by buying products from sweatshops,you're supporting a family in need that is less fortunate than you, you putrid swine.

Knyte, your liberal viewpoint obscures historical fact.

Again, I am not a liberal. I am as socialist. There is a massive difference between the two.

While we're taking about the supreme court, let's not that they viewed slaves as property and not people. So, you say that a job is less important than another person, but they were in fact not a person.

Which is even worse. Someone who is obviously a person is (as I said) literally denied their personhood. And if you think that they somehow didn't notice that Africans were people by 1861, well, then that makes it kind of weird that they outlawed slavery (on the basis of human rights) two years later.

People work at sweatshops because it's the only job they have that isn't simply awful work and little pay. It may not be the best quality, or very safe, but it's just an economic phase all nations have gone through. Look at China and south Korea. These nations are better off for it.

Again, that's what I have a problem with. Capitalism creates artificial scarcity by restricting access to the means of production and promoting class oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. That's why they're essentially forced to work in a sweatshop and have no better options.

These are people who will be living completely shitty lives because first-worlders aren't willing to pay more for clothes (and because we live in a system that rewards human exploitation).

We are consciously making the decision to oppress people so we can have an easier life. That's horrible.

Put simply, by buying products from sweatshops,you're supporting a family in need that is less fortunate than you, you putrid swine.

Alternatively, buying textiles produced by worker collectives supports the replacement of that system with one in which workers are no longer being exploited. In a capitalist society, each consumer decision is a vote- and I'm going to go ahead and keep voting for the less shitty system so that it replaces the really, really bad one. I'd rather give $10 to a laborer at a third-world collective than $1 to a sweatshop laborer, so that sweatshop practices lose a little bit their advantage and, with enough luck, die out someday.

You keep looking at the symptoms and just accepting the system that creates them. It's the system that needs to be destroyed.

Let me rephrase that : 50 years of sweatshops = century of economic growth and new job opportunities.

Capitalism isn't about oppression, it's about opportunity. If someone is rich, it's because they worked their asses off to get there.

The problem with capitalism in the current world is that there isn't opportunities for everybody. But, it's a situation being remedied.

Hitler's doctrine in this matter isn't that bad : If you don't find a job, don't accept a job we make available to you, you will be shot.

Hitler's doctrine in this matter isn't that bad

Can't argue with Hitler.

from a guy in the USSR clan and who has communist in his name? yes. I did expect that. Not to mention that Communism would never exist without rebellion.

The Communist manifesto itself defended rebellion and even ENCOURAGED it. So yeah. It is entirely expected that a communist would support rebellion.

So, I'm not socialist, but I agree with kynte on this issue more than anyone else. The Republican Party refuses to even look at anything Obama puts in front of them. Then they complain when Obama uses executive action. They gerrymander to maintain majority in legislatures and refuse to listen to liberal government laws by finding some bullshit loophole. Go Donald Trump, right? And knyte, you're party supports lowering taxes on the rich! Please tell me how that makes sense. To me it's them trying to please their gigantic corporate donors (and themselves), who would love to keep all of their billion dollars (because you can't make do with 600,000,000).

My american mother is a liberal. But I'm actually going to agree (vaugely) with Eklipse here. Why can't a state vote to secede? I get that it really isn't good for the government, but if society is THAT different from the US government's, then the state might as well be its own country. As long as there's a vote held, and the federal government recognizes it. You can't just say "I think I'll leave the Union now!" But what do I know? I'm just a Canadian with only the news and my mother's opinions to go on.

im starting to think secession is not such a bad thing. it would break the power of the US, but by what right does the US get to retain power? we are supposed to support the strength of the US (american citizens anyway) because the US is supposed to support us by working for us. the reality is this is not happening now. what we have now is a government bought by the wealthy without any genuine concern for it's people. so what right does the US have to retain it's federal power?

during the time of the civil war our moral justification for preserving the union was our belief in universal human rights (though most people's conception of that was far from perfect). our practical justification was that allowing the south to secede would give precedence for other states to secede, and we would likely end up a bunch of small hostile states vulnerable to european imperialism, which was a real concern at the time.

the situation is quite a bit different now. the government is practically opposed to secession because we would lose our imperial hegemony. i can't think of a moral opposition, unless the seceding states blatantly promoted persecution of homosexuals or black people (it's really not that far fetched).

i would rather our government remain strong and people take back power from moneyed interests, but if that doesn't happen then it would be better to split this country up than keep the evil empire we have now.

although the thought of a right wing totalitarian government in the south sickens me, the thought of what the US does to other countries and it's own people sickens me just as much

No. Fuck you. You don't get to do that. Most of your conservative shitholes are net receivers of tax money. You also have a shitload of military installations belonging to the federal government. It's like a psycho girlfriend breaking up with you and keeping the house she didn't fucking pay for.


But you do realize that the US is majority conservative, right? Until the old people die, of course, but even then conservatives have a much higher turnout, and have their votes inflated in most states thanks to gerrymandering.

Look, you can't tell me that the conservative side is being marginalized when you control the majority of state-level legislatures, governorships, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme fucking Court.

You guys are just being little bitches because you can't have your way all the time. Great- you know what that's called? A FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

Highest receives of tax money? Please, when you can prove that, prove it. Conservatives have always pushed for less money being given away, not more.

Also- exactly as Eklipse said, we're under minority rule. Which means, officially, we're not a democracy. At least, not technichally.

And it is. But you don't win all the time. Moreover, American democracy is bounded by civil rights. You can't simply vote to violate a civil right.

It's not "liberal rule" when the president has to use executive actions to implement any policy and where Congress can't pass anything liberal. Moreover, whenever something liberal does get passed, it's now ignored by the states. I don't think you've been to a Southern/conservative state recently- policies like prison privatization, school vouchers for religious schools, creationism being taught in school, historical revisionism, union-busting, etc., have been incredibly conservative ones implemented in the near past.

The Supreme Court, again, is not supposed to be implementing what the majority of Americans want but rather limiting democratic behavior based on the Constitution- i.e., telling us when we've done something unconstitutional. Their decisions can't be used to determine whether the US is under minority rule, but even then the SCOTUS's biggest cases- Hobby Lobby and Citizens United sided with conservative views.

Untrue. In SCOTUS's biggest cases, they sided with liberal views, I.E., allowing Obamacare and nationwide Gay Marriage.

Also, have you been to a southern/conservative state recently? None of what you said is true about the south, it's a bunch of s***.




Also, I hate the fact that the south US is considered more racist than the North. The North IS MUCH MORE RACIST THAN THE SOUTH. People are just more honest about it down here.

And if it's so racist- why are black people starting to come BACK TO THE SOUTH?

Because in the North, there's self imposed segregation. In the north, blacks are equal, but not accepted.

Highest receives of tax money? Please, when you can prove that, prove it. Conservatives have always pushed for less money being given away, not more.

http://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

I encourage you to look at the numbers for yourself.

If the U.S. losses its power.

Goodbye Taiwan
Goodbye Ukraine
Goodbye Shiite Iraq

Oh and if you guys hate America so much then WHY DO YOU FUCKING LIVE IN IT!

Edited 7/7/2015 19:45:07

It's true that Southern states (generally) receive more government money. (Although plenty of non-southern states are very bad about it as well.) However, this isn't because, "Ha, southerners are stupid." It all boils down to history. The South got DEVASTATED in the Civil War and their economy was smashed, combine that with a failure of reconstruction and those states lost all hope of ever catching up with the north economically.

It's funny how that's the same logic that's used to argue that reparations are legitimate for blacks even today, but the populations that argue for those respective populations are entirely disjoint...

yes,poor South! Pure-eh,poor(was meant) murderers,poor racists,poor supporters of
racial discrimination...ooow...you were so bad to them...you devastated the*ehem*
wonderful landscape...ooo,you bad yankees,poor,poor southerners are poor with no,absolutely,no economy and "industry" left,right?

http://www.google.com/search?q=Sherman's+march+to+the+sea&safe=active&client=ms-android-cricket&hl=en-US&source=android-browser&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ei=ZjucVcWQHsaosAWvw7KwCA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAw

To be fair Sherman's March was pretty much total war and half of it was to destroy everything in their path, from communications of the confederacy to the moral of the southern civilian populace.