- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
You must log in or # to comment.
As someone who is trapped down here with these lunatics… please send help…
I’m trapped here, too! While I’m not happy about the situation, I’m incredibly excited to see all of my old history teachers get shit on when Texans find out that:
-
While we CAN split into 5 states, we CANNOT form our own country without repercussions. The concept of Texas returning to its own country is not in any constitution nor agreement. While there is an agreement that we can become multiple states, it’s redundant when compared to Article IV, Section 3 of the US freaking Constitution.
-
We’re not the only state that was once it’s own country. Hell, Hawaii was not only its own sovereign nation, it was a fucking kingdom. Other than being the biggest, dumbest, and drunkest, no part of our previous classification before joining the Union is special considering that Vermont was its own country 40% longer than we were.
-
As long as we’re dispelling ignorant Texas myths, no we’re not the only state who can fly their flag at the same height as the US flag. Literally any state can. They’re called flag codes and they’re insanely easy to find and read. You’ll find that most self-avowed “patriots” tend to breach the most flag codes.
There’s no such thing as “Texas pride” anymore. It’s all been replaced with ignorance and disrespect. The last time we got drunk and punched our landlord in the face, we spent 10 years boisterously bragging about how cool it is to be dirty and homeless while quietly crying to our northern neighbor and begging them to bring us in off the streets. And while we told everyone that one of things that made us so cool was how hard we shit our pants when we
defeated Mexicogot abandoned by Mexico like a parent too disappointed in their child to even argue anymore, we got so desperate for a new mommy or daddy that we considered going home with anyone who made the mistake of looking at us while walking by:But even while coming to prize independence, Texas found itself weak and bankrupt, newly menaced by a Mexico that never recognized her right to exist. With historical repercussions that can only be guessed at today, the country’s leaders seriously considered taking Texas into the British Empire.
So, to our future Piss Baby in Chief, I dare you to try. My city alone has a shocking number of military bases and I’m sure any one of them can easily get foreign-leader-killing drones in the air within seconds of having a new enemy holding US troops hostage.
I’m excited for the wannabe domestic terrorists in West Texas to realize that sparsely vegetated and habituated scrubland is a drone operator’s ISR wet dream to thwack pickup convoys, and have a public come-to-Jesus moment before decrying this pointless dick measuring contest. Any kind armed rebellion without near total collapse of the federal government, is a fantasy
You don’t even need drones. Insurgents aren’t particularly technical, and tend to use unsecured communications that are easily pinpointed for a precision HIMARS or smart artillery strike. Ask the Russians how it went for them. They lost thousands in Ukraine because soldiers used cellphones to call home to Mama - calls processed through Ukrainian cellular towers.
You don’t think if the government started sending drones after pickups that they wouldn’t gain more popular support?
Briefly, sure.
The gov would gain some too. From me at least.
It’s starting to feel a bit like the biggest problems (climate, billionaires, guns, inequality) in the world will need such huge changes to the status quo, that something massive will have to happen to initiate it.
I hope I’m wrong though.
Words and anger? Definitely. Support/action? Very likely no.
It’s the same problem AQA & ISIS have: you are powerless against the drone without MADPADs, and you aren’t getting those - maybe not even with proxy state support. How does the ‘Trump Train’ achieve anything beyond banditry-level terrorism, against an air power with PGMs?
I’m also trapped. We should group up.
-
Leave.
Me when privilege
I’m sure if you tried, you could leave.
Tell that to the $43 I have to my name and the hundreds of dollars/many hours needed to go to obtain a diagnosis on my current health crisis. I don’t know how I’m going to pay for all that, upcoming rent, and eat for the next few weeks… I’m spending money I don’t have, to get by, and I have no available credit to use because I can’t build credit without getting a secured card, which I can’t even save $200 for because I’ve been struggling to make up for over a decade of making around $20k/year while living in a large city. I can’t even keep the one shitty car I own on the road doing all of the work on it myself. I get around in a car I’m borrowing from my parents, which they can’t really afford to let me borrow because they’re in crippling debt themselves. And no, I don’t spend on frivolous things. I don’t drink anything but water and one coffee a day, which I make at home. All my meals are cheap, mostly rice/frozen veggie stir-fry’s. My only option for escape is to become a vagabond and hope my undiagnosed heart issues don’t kill me, if my diagnosed issues don’t first, without meds.
But, I’m wasting my words. You have enough privilege that you can’t fathom a world in which things are just simply unfeasible. Good for you.
My bad, it’s impossible for you to leave.
Just sit around and wait for others to solve your problems for you.
I’m sure that will be a good use of your time.
I’m not sitting around waiting on others. I’m diligently working to improve my situation with the limited resources I have. My limited resources don’t afford me the luxury to pick my entire life up and move. That was the point of my post, in case you missed it, you willfully ignorant twat.
The problem is that you’re assuming I suggested it was easy.
You assume that any suggestion must be easy in order for it to be viable.
You might want to calm down with the personal insults.
deleted by creator
A non-amicably seceded Texas is doomed as a country. No food, drugs, or medical supplies from the rest of the country. No parts to repair their oil wells or vehicles (made by businesses in other states). Companies like John Deere would be forced to brick all equipment in Texas. Then the US government imposes sanctions on any country doing business with Texas, and businesses outside Texas are restricted from doing business in Texas. Nobody comes to their rescue when the power grid fails in an ice storm or a hurricane blows through the state.
Face it. States are too interdependent to cut ties with the rest of the country.
Brexit showed us that situation like this the ‘bigger person’ in the conflict will try not to starve millions of people to death and will not simply cut them off. We as individualise would surely like to see Brits/Texans suffer all the consequences but politicians are usually more pragmatic than this and have to think long term. Turning Texas into 3rd world country wouldn’t do any good to anyone. Blocking supplies as some sort of collective punishment would simply be immoral.
Of course they are not going to secede but if they did they would still get all the supplies they need. Their economy would suffer greatly but they would just blame US and keep going.
I mean, we’ve also seen a lot of cases of the exact opposite. It’s entirely a question of which position is held to be long term better not just to the parties in question, but to the actual politicians as well.
The UK is more valuable to the EU as a less favorable trading partner than as a pariah, and there was no plausible way for the EU to convince it’s members that there was any course to take other than letting them leave exactly as fast as the treaties said they could.
They made it about as painful as they could while fulfilling their treaty obligations.There is no defined legal mechanism for a state to leave the union. There’s no long term incentive for politicians to create one. There’s no individual incentive for one either, at the national level.
Punishing secessionists to maintain precedent would be the only viable move for any politician.
Of course you don’t let them starve, but you also don’t let ships into your territorial waters near areas with violent insurgents, and you warn your neighbors that trade will suffer if they’re found to be supplying said insurgents.It’s literally the position of the US government that secession is not possible, not just “not permitted”.
States didn’t seceed during the civil war, they were never their own country, and any treaties or legal actions taken by their supposed governments have no weight.Don’t look at it through the lens of “how would the US treat the new nation of Texas”, but “how would the US treat the armed rebels in the state of Texas”.
I mean, we’ve also seen a lot of cases of the exact opposite.
Where? Where was there a recent independence movement that succeeded and was punished by the original country?
Of course you don’t let them starve, but you also don’t let ships into your territorial waters near areas with violent insurgents, and you warn your neighbors that trade will suffer if they’re found to be supplying said insurgents.
Wouldn’t blocking supplies starve them?
Again, this is silly debate as Texas will not secede but if they do it’s crazy to think that US government would just abandon millions of democratic voters living there. There are pretty much two options: either US government would use force to regain the rule there or would pretend that everything is OK and keep cooperating (like Spain and Catalonia, give them more and more independence without formally recognizing it). They definitely would not impose blockade and risk creating North Korea style regime right at their border.
Clarifying that it has to succeed is a bit weird. The civil war is the part of the host nation retaliating against the breakaway faction. It’s kinda like asking when has a country ever retaliated after they stop retaliating.
In any case, the war in Kosovo and the Sri Lankan civil war come to mind. Oh, and Ireland. That one’s nice and complicated.
You blockade supplies from other countries, because it’s unacceptable for someone to supply armed insurgents.
Trade and supplies can still be moved around by the Government to ensure they don’t get taken by insurgents.
That’s just how you do counter insurgency. Keep them from getting food, fuel and ammunition. Give those things to people who agree with you, and make sure they have everything they need.I agree that Texas isn’t even going to try, but if they do the US isn’t going to just say “okay, now you can use our shipping lanes to trade with China while we sort this out”.
Ok, we’re simply talking about two different things. You’re saying that if US would fight Texas they would cut off their supplies. Yes, your right, kind of obvious.
What I’m talking about is that they would not target civilians even in case of a civil war and in case Texas did somehow became independent (they will not) they would not try to starve all Texans to death as a form of punishment. We were talking about consequence of Texas becoming independent, not about what would happen during the war. Yes, the independence movements are often bloody but even Ireland has good relations with UK now. UK didn’t block their accession to EU or anything like that just to punish them.
I would absolutely expect Texas to throw a fit that they would be treated like a foreign country that now has to do trade deals and visas and shit rather than just a cool super state that can do whatever they want.
If you or anyone would like to see Brits or Texans ‘suffer their consequences’ for a minority of misinformed people deciding the future of their state, you need to get some empathy and perspective. Texans haven’t voted for this, and 17 million people decided Brexit for a country of nearly 70 million.
I just meant is a normal human reaction (I even said it would be immoral. Did you see that?). I understand that people like to see this as some sort or ‘justice’. You keep telling Brits that it’s a bad decision and it would hurt them and then voilà, they suffer the consequences. It just feels good to be right but of course if you think about it a little you realize it’s a overall terrible thing and feel bad for all the misled people.
Nothing would make me happier than to see those braindead republicans catch the car, so to speak. They have absolutely no foresight whatsoever, they just think they can pray for a viable government into existence. Texas is such a joke and they think all the other states are just jealous they aren’t Texas, lol embarrassing.
Texan here. The vast majority of us don’t want to secede and think this is crazy. Please don’t curse us along with the monsters that are ruining our lives.
And before the “just move” train starts, a lot of us would like to, but we need access to our current support systems to survive, and can’t detangle our lives from our area at the drop of a hat.
The vast majority of us don’t want to secede and think this is crazy.
Maybe they don’t want to secede exactly, but I’m not so sure they think this is crazy. Although the demographics in Texas have shifted some in recent years, Abbott was still elected with more than a 10% margin, and polls seem to indicate that a majority of Texans support him on this issue. I don’t doubt that most of the people you know agree with you but Texas is a big state with a very large rural population, and most of them very much believe Texas has the right to defend its own border with Mexico.
Do you live here too?
And yeah, we think we have a right to defend the border, but that isn’t the same as saying that our way of doing it supersedes the national government, or that it is something to secede from the union over.
And who are they polling? Because the last several elections have proven that polls are often wrong in this country, and especially this state.
Everyone allowed to vote is who they “polled”… We’re talking about the 2022 Texas gubernatorial election…
You can’t say that the majority of people in Texas don’t like the leadership but there’s nothing you can do about it when Abbott got nearly 20% more votes…
I understand what you’re saying, and it’s nothing personal against you. But, can I ask what are you doing to help? If being cursed with the consequences of personal comfort and complacency is what it takes to create actual change for the people that Texas so be it. I’m sure the majority don’t like it, it’s embarrassing, but what are they doing? Are they calling/emailing/writing to leadership? Are they voting? Are they encouraging their family members to vote? Until the majority get active against this insanity it’s going to get worse.
As it so happens, yes. My family has been politically active as Texas progressives for almost 100 years now, and I’m part of that chain. I’ve been at the protests, made the phone calls, signed the petitions, and donated the money I can spare. Furthermore, I have a lot of friends who have been doing the same.
We aren’t all complacent down here. Our state has been heavily gerrymandered to the point that we need a lot more than a simple majority to win an election. We’re doing everything we can, but anyone looking at the Republican Party right now can see that it is a huge and dangerous organization. They use smoke and mirrors to make their control in this state seem a lot more absolute than it actually is.
Edit: I also wanted to add that when you call your Texas representatives, they don’t answer the phone. Shame doesn’t sway these people, which is why our best hope is changing demographics and getting out the vote.
All I have to say is keep up the good fight. I know not all of Texas is like my family who are trump humping bastards. Keep fighting, I hope you guys can make some progress and de-program some of your peers but I know it’s an uphill battle. I don’t even live there and I’m exhausted with it all. I truly truly appreciate what you guys are doing. I don’t even live in Texas and I’m exhausted with their politics. Good luck, rooting for you from the East Coast 💖
One day, when this state is truly purple and we stop with the regressive politics, I hope people come visit us here and see what some of the good things are about Texas. Big Tex at the State Fair is really a sight to behold, and our brisket and Tex Mex will bring tears of joy to your eyes. Plus, “y’all” was way ahead of its time as an inclusive and non-gendered term—we don’t get enough credit for that.
That’s the Texas I’m from, that’s the Texas I’m proud of, and that’s the Texas that awaits America on the other side if y’all can help us throw off our republican shackles.
4head why didn’t I think of that? Just vote! It’s so fucking obvious! I’m gonna vote even HARDER this time! That’ll fix it!
yeah. that will fix it.
What if mexico just decides to retake what used to be theirs and send the army to conquer seceded Texas? 🤔🤔🤔 Serious question
No one in Texas would allow that to happen. So, war
Pretty sure that Texas cannot defeat Mexico without the help of the other states of the US xD. Time for the mexicans to reclaim what was lost.
I think if Texas does secede it will still have trade partners. I have a feeling it would ironically be Mexico and even China could mix in Russia in there too. Basically anyone who hates USA.
Radical isolationists having trade partners? LoL who? Mexico has far more reasons to hate TX alone than the remaining 49. They could basically write off Europe and the Middle East.
Ok yeah. Russia would be all over them. If they could bypass the US blockade.
I don’t want to compare Texas to NK but since you mentioned a radical isolationist I instantly thought of NK. Based from this article https://www.forbes.com/sites/katharinabuchholz/2023/05/26/who-is-north-korea-trading-with-infographic/?sh=532c63bf1496 it still has trading partners.
Edit: gave the wrong link
Nation states don’t hate each other. They have no feelings, only interests. If it’s in Mexico’s interest to trade with Texas, they will.
Radical isolationist Texans have no idea what makes a nation state besides hating other countries.
Why would Mexico trade with a seceded Texas? Would they want to end all commerce with the U.S.?
It seems logical to me they are neighbors. It may be not at first, but if Texas does survives after whatever war happens. Eventually a neighbouring nation would see Texas as a potential trading partner. We can see the same thing with Pakistan and India they still trade despite they hate each other.
Russia and Ukraine are neighbors. North Korea and South Korea are neighbors. I have no idea why you think neighbors means trading partners.
I’m sure both examples given were at some point have trade relationship or was open to trade relations, I think NK and SK had the Sunshine policy. It may not be now. A close one was normalization of Israel and Arab countries could eventually lead to trading between Israel and Arab nations which Hamas ofcourse took that away. If we look for another one is Indonesia and Malaysia the creation of it was bloody but look at it now. Both nations are trading. Taiwan and China still both trade despite being technically at war with each other. Japan who did horrible things during WW2 now trades with it’s used to be enemies.
I see, so you mean eventually Mexico would trade with Texas. Sure. Maybe. But not any time soon after they seceded. The U.S. is Mexico’s #1 trading partner. Why would they jeopardize that to help a single breakaway U.S. state?
It’s like how Canada and America are so interdependent and … Wait a sec.
Sedition is it?
They’re trying to provoke a reaction that they can sell to their media-fueled-paranoid Christonationalists to drive them to the polls.
deleted by creator
They should react, because ignoring this line-toeing is what causes them to just be bolder next time. Remember when all the Republican calls for banning abortion were just rabble rousing for political benefit and they didn’t really mean it? Trump telling his followers to fight? Republicans saying trans people are molesting kids?
Ignoring their provocation isn’t winning 5D chess, it’s paving the way to actual violence. If a state says they’re going to block the federal government and calls for aligned states to send troops to support them, you need to shut that shit down.
It’s going through the courts and I’m sure simply escalating has its own constitutional issue.
The military is not a police force. You are asking that we activate the thing Trump wants to use for authoritarian rule.
I’d rather have the all the guardsman found in contempt and then issued arrest warrants that are enforced. That’s one example of what could happen.
This isn’t a question of law. The law is entirely clear that federal agents (a police force) have dominion over the border. They shouldn’t have gone through the courts in the first place, they should have simply showed up with a bunch of federal agents and started arresting anyone who stopped them. There’s nothing unclear about what the constitution says happens here. You don’t need a court to say blocking a federal agent from doing their job is illegal.
They don’t need to bring in the military unless armed agents of Texas start resisting, in which case it is insurrection and the military is the right tool for the job. This idea that maybe we should just let Texas play at rebellion for 9 months until the court tells them (again) that federal supremacy is real is the ridiculous.
Yeah, make up a fake cause and then brag to your base about how good of a job you’re doing tackling it.
It’s a Texas owned park. The Feds are claiming it for a processing area.
That’s where Texas appears to be staking their claim: it’s ours and you can’t take it under the Constitution.
Everything else is people on both sides dreaming up fantasy scenarios with little basis in what’s likely. Yes, Texas will continue to escalate, but they aren’t going to try to secede.
From the article:
"On Friday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton refused the federal government’s request for access to the border and demanded proof that the federal government has the authority to turn a Texas park into a port of entry. "
I know Texas is picking and choosing the framing, but the above is what the AG (corrupt as he may be) is saying. Because he needs to win a case.
This whole thing is political theater. Literally half a mile down the road from the park the wall is open and immigrants are able to freely cross. Immigrants who cross the border aren’t clueless or aimless either; the vast majority head straight to a DHS checkpoint to start the asylum process. This is because most people crossing are literally just trying to seek a better life by working the jobs Americans refuse to do for pay that’s higher than what they could earn in their home countries. Additionally, while reports of increased numbers of people crossing the border are true, so is the opposite. People are leaving at almost the same rate. It’s crazy how people don’t see that immigration is a made up issue.
All politics is theater. If you can’t handle that, get off the stage.
The average european:
If America falls we’re taking all of you fuckers with us
That might sadly be true.
100% true. We are kind of a tad bit important to the world economy. The way I worded it was over the top for comedic value but when it comes down to it, if America goes down its gonna be an absolute fucking mess for everyone.
The number of countries that pegged their currency to the USD is staggering. If the US defaults for any reason the global economy ceases to exist. Crashed by Adam Tooze is a great deep dive into the 2008 financial crises and goes in depth on how interconnected all the major economies are.
You’re also forgetting the general slide into fascism that could have far more dire effects on the world.
That is definitely true, but I will still be laughing on the way down with you ;)
I personally welcome my always was Chinese overlord
+5 to your social credit for willfully accepting the CCP.
-25 for engaging with an unsanctioned online community.
Ok, do it you cowards. I double dog dare you.
So the largest threat to the United States is Gregory Abbot…
#alwaysHasBeen
I’m not JAG, but article 142 seems to apply to the Texas State Guardsmen. They’re following unlawful orders.
deleted by creator
So why can’t Texas form its own country?
I kinda understand that Benjamin Franklin in a god and he wrote something, and the words of the messiah’s is infallible or something. I get that’s it is written somewhere, that’s not what I’m asking.
So I don’t mean that. I mean doesn’t america always bang on about people being able to govern themselves rather than been forced into another government they don’t want to be a part of. Like if 60% or hell even 100% of texans wanted to be their own country. Doesn’t stopping that go against the fundamental defining block of America.
Couldn’t that just get voted on and passed?
I kinda understand that Benjamin Franklin in a god and he wrote something the words of the messiah’s work is infallible or something. I get that’s it is written somewhere, that’s not what I’m asking.
What in the world are you talking about about here?
9 times out of 10 when you talk to an American about something they say “you can’t do that because the constitution says X, Y, Z”. It always reminds me of Muslims, Jews or Christians talking about their holy books.
Most other nationalities make arguments based on some logic, or reason. If there is a law that stops them they talk about changing it, that isn’t an issue. But for Americans the constitution is something that is almost holy. They make arguments based on the fact that the constitution says something not because of any reasoning behind it.
But I’m not American so the argument more often than not falls flat. It’s kinda relevant now but that’s not what I want to know.
I’ll actually rephrase the sentence, in the orginal post as it’s a bit crap.
In fairness they do that because the Constitution, and legal precedent surrounding it, is the cornerstone of all federal law, supersedes all state and local laws, and is pretty close to impossible to change in the current political climate. It’s pretty hard to change in more “normal” times!
It’s more than that.
You ask as Christian why they don’t kill and they will says “God said thou shall not kill”. When really the underlying argument is that it is morally wrong to do so … obviously this point can be fleshed out a lot but for non Christians is not about the book
You talk about how freedom of speech is an ideal that the world and we should strive for more of it and Americans will say “The first amendment says the govement can’t censor you. Say nothing about corporations” then all the other Americans are like “haha yea got him” and “perfect explaination. Omg people are so stupid”.
When in fact I don’t actually care what the constitution says I’m talking more philosophy than “religion” just because your foreign law says one thing doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion that differs from it and honestly that isn’t a reason for you to have that opinion either.
[Also in researching this comment I realised that freedom of speech is the first ammendment not in the orginal text. So I look a bit stupid, but whatever I can’t be expected to know the laws of every foreign country. The point still stands it seems like Americans treat the constitution as holy]
For sure, plenty see it as a static document. They’re known as “originalists” or “strict constructionists.” Many take that a step or two too far into quasi -religion.
FWIW, nobody says the Constitution applies anywhere outside the US. You bring up murder as an example and say the underlying reason is that it’s immoral to kill. So why do we have laws against killing people? I mean we all know it’s immoral to kill, so why do we need the laws? Because not everything that is immoral is illegal. Not everything that’s moral is legal, either. You’re treating two different things as if they were one and the same. Plenty of people will tell you that two dudes getting married is “immoral,” and even cite Bible passages. I feel like you and I would probably disagree with them. This is where law can step in and establish the boundary individuals have to respect regardless of their moral views. Morals are for individuals, laws are for societies because we don’t all always agree on what’s “right.”
I don’t speak of free speech as this all healing thing, and anyone who does is naive, at best. In fact there are certainly plenty of times where free speech has no place. I don’t have free speech at work, for example, and I understand why.
The point of the free speech thing is that Americans will say any view you have against the constitution is wrong because the constitution says something else. Americans online and in person absolutely act like the constitution controls the Internet.
The moment Texas seriously considers leaving, every business would immediately pull up and leave. There are huge companies in Texas that would pull out to avoid the drama and fascism awaiting a “free” Texas.
Texas Instruments would just become New Mexico Instruments, not a big change. :)
Well that’s a different issue.
I’m not sure it would be as drastic as that because there is lots of oil and with things like Brexit not everyone left.
But just the concept of leaving seems like that is what America is about. The Americans even put self-determination into the UN.
Are you under the strange impression that Benjamin Franklin wrote the U.S. Constitution?
Same reason my child can’t declare their bedroom as their own legally separate house
That’s uncomparable. You are saying Texans are unable to choose what they do in life. That sounds like prison. So if your child becomes an adult grows up and wants a place of his own, bearing in mind for this analogy to work there must only be one house as you can’t just make more land. You still own where he lives and what he does? He doesn’t have equal control as you, sounds like he’s born into slavery.
your argument is totally neutered by the fact that until the kid meets specific legal requirements, they are absolutely required to stay where the parent dictates.
the law doesn’t allow texas to just up and leave the union either. they’d have to go through a lot of bureaucratic processes before that would be a viable option.
did you really think this was a solid “gotcha”? lol
Texans absolutely have more rights than a child being controlled by a parent.
A texan would have equal right over anything done in the country where a child would not.
Legal experts in the US consider the idea of a state seceding from the USA to be a closed question. There is no legal route to secession. The state of Texas would have to go to war with the US to enforce them seceding. It would fail, and abbot would be tried for treason and be sentanced to death.
I know that may sound overblown but it’s pretty open and shut, legally speaking
Because Texas, like every other part of America, doesn’t belong to just the people that live there, it belongs to all Americans.
While everyone has the right to leave America if they don’t like it, they don’t get take part of America with them when they go.
Your forgetting it’s a country founded on hypocrisy.
I mean doesn’t america always bang on about people being able to govern themselves rather than been forced into another government they don’t want to be a part of.
Because any country supports only stuff that benefits them. And the states is no different. Do you really think USA cares about democracy and sovereignity in the middle east?
They only protect their own interests and Texas secession is against these interests: If Texas would get it’s sovereignity, what’s stopping other 50 states from doing the same?
I think this is it.
I agree with you. But don’t Americans feel like they should go for it? That’s what confuses me
