Texas looks to follow UK's example

[abaris]

Any question of secession was settled 150 years ago. The hopeful schadenfreude in this thread, I think, is that of Brexiters looking for validation.

I hope you don't think, I'm feeling Schadenfreude. But I'm honestly interested, based on my - limited - knowledge of the civil war. What legal document actually prevents secession. Other than precedence, I mean.

[account_inactive]

Honestly, I couldn't care less if Texas gets its independence. I was merely commenting on the issue because Americans have been flocking to the Brexit threads and bitching.

I hope you don't think, I'm feeling Schadenfreude. But I'm honestly interested, based on my - limited - knowledge of the civil war. What legal document actually prevents secession. Other than precedence, I mean.

I'd like to know as well. You say I don't know a lot about your history and you may be right, so why don't you enlighten me, Thump? Do tell.

[Redbeard The Pink]

I see the same arguments used against Texas here as used against any separatist movement.

I'm a firm believer in the right to self determination. There's a shared sense of comradeship between separatists from Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec. If the Texans want to leave then I say good luck to them.  I certainly don't buy the whole argument about there being no legal means by which to leave. That argument has been used on Scotland in the past. It's false because it's only relevant to the current political and framework. If the people demand to leave then the country will leave and the rule book gets ripped up and replaced.

Saying that though, there is no chance in the short term of Texas leaving. These things take a long time to build. Many decades. What's more, there needs to be a real sense of identity behind the grass roots movement. National identity very often stems from both geographical areas and cultural history. For example, you can tell when you have entered Scotland because the landscape changes dramatically. I don't know about the geography of Texas but it doesn't have the cultural history of being a separate country.

You could argue the same with Quebec in Canada, but their cultural history is a continuation of France's culture.

Maybe in the future secession won't start a bloody civil war. But the Federal government has both asserted that power and enforced it by arms, and that is the reality on the ground any secessionsists must face. And when push comes to shove, it won't happen.

Ultima ratio regis, and all that.

By seizing the land illegally, they would have to take it by force, and something tells me that wouldn't go so great against our military. Sure, they could vote to leave, but they can't really make it happen unless the US suddenly decides all the land and industry in Texas just isn't worth the fuss. Something tells me that wouldn't happen.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Any question of secession was settled 150 years ago. The hopeful schadenfreude in this thread, I think, is that of Brexiters looking for validation.

I hope you don't think, I'm feeling Schadenfreude. But I'm honestly interested, based on my - limited - knowledge of the civil war. What legal document actually prevents secession. Other than precedence, I mean.

There's an 1869 Supreme Court ruling. There's nothing in the Constitution.

Knowing your historical bent, I know there's no ugliness behind your question.

[Redbeard The Pink]

Honestly, I couldn't care less if Texas gets its independence. I was merely commenting on the issue because Americans have been flocking to the Brexit threads and bitching.

I hope you don't think, I'm feeling Schadenfreude. But I'm honestly interested, based on my - limited - knowledge of the civil war. What legal document actually prevents secession. Other than precedence, I mean.

I'd like to know as well. You say I don't know a lot about your history and you may be right, so why don't you enlighten me, Thump? Do tell.

Texas tried to secede circa the American Civil War, and at that time it was ruled by the SCOTUS that the Union is insoluble by state actions, and I think the case was Texas v White. Essentially, the court ruled it Unconstitutional to secede, so the document in question is the Constitution, technically.

[Redbeard The Pink]

Delete this

[I_am_not_mafia]

Maybe in the future secession won't start a bloody civil war. But the Federal government has both asserted that power and enforced it by arms, and that is the reality on the ground any secessionsists must face. And when push comes to shove, it won't happen.

Ultima ratio regis, and all that.

I disagree. Not that Texas has a chance of independence, but that it must necessarily end in a war. Sure that has been the case in the past but it's not the case in modern history. We live in an age of mass media and social media. Try to imagine a world in which the US army enforced martial law in Texas because the local government under a democratic mandate from the people decided to stop paying taxes to the US and declared independence. Think about the quagmire that was Iraq. Think about the standing of the US on the international stage if it came to that.

[account_inactive]

Honestly, I couldn't care less if Texas gets its independence. I was merely commenting on the issue because Americans have been flocking to the Brexit threads and bitching.


I'd like to know as well. You say I don't know a lot about your history and you may be right, so why don't you enlighten me, Thump? Do tell.

Texas tried to secede before the American Civil War, and at that time it was ruled by the SCOTUS that the Union is insoluble by state actions, and I think the case was Texas v White. Essentially, the court ruled it Unconstitutional to secede, so the document in question is the Constitution, technically.

Interesting. Thanks for the answer.

[Redbeard The Pink]

You're welcome

[Thumpalumpacus]

Maybe in the future secession won't start a bloody civil war. But the Federal government has both asserted that power and enforced it by arms, and that is the reality on the ground any secessionsists must face. And when push comes to shove, it won't happen.

Ultima ratio regis, and all that.

By seizing the land illegally, they would have to take it by force, and something tells me that wouldn't go so great against our military. Sure, they could vote to leave, but they can't really make it happen unless the US suddenly decides all the land and industry in Texas just isn't worth the fuss. Something tells me that wouldn't happen.

That's exactly my point: the Federal government would not allow such an act, and would take up arms to prevent it. We have, after all, already done so.The state has no organic military units worth mentioning that aren't at one point under federal military jurisdiction, and secession would be grounds for Federalizing the state's National Guard, removing it from the Governor's purview. And even if every single Texan Guard-member revolted in support of a secession, it could not withstand the force of arms brought to bear against it.

The entire issue is silly for this reason.