RE: Ron Paul - Gone but still an Asshole
November 20, 2012 at 4:35 pm
(This post was last modified: November 20, 2012 at 4:36 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(November 20, 2012 at 4:25 pm)Ryantology Wrote:(November 20, 2012 at 4:12 pm)Tiberius Wrote: That wasn't my point. My point was that a state should be able to secede if it wants to. Currently in the US, I understand that there is no legal method for secession. All the states may be united at the moment, but the moment secession becomes popular in one of them, and it is effectively prohibited from leaving the union, you cannot call it "united" anymore without calling into question some definitions.
Fair enough.
It should only be legal if a plurality of the national population wishes to let them go. Every state is in a binding contract to form our union, and the secession of states would have huge effects on others. One state should not have the unilateral right to secede.
I of course don't think any state should have to put up with preventable session efforts that would regard as an weaken infleunce on itself in the long run.
But using your logic, would't a plurality of other nations also get a definitive say in whether it suits them to accept any changes to geopolitical situation resulting from such a session?
For example, Some countries looking to the United States to keep the Chinese from sweeping up all their off shore islands might want to veto any session that would take American attention and resource away from keeping up its treaty obligations.