Seceeding from the Union

[TimeEntrance]

I’m from Wisconsin. And my Wisconsinite opinion is I’d give Texas back to Mexico.

Just saying…

 

[edwest2]

Leaving aside the question of whether or not it is prudent to actually secede (not “succeed”!) from the union, I think it is a good thing for all Americans to understand how to approach the OP’s question. I think looking at it from the perspective of the Principle of Double Effect can be instructive. The Principle of Double Effect addresses the question of whether or not it is permissible to take a certain course of action if it can reasonably be foreseen to have two effects, one of which is good and the other of which is evil.

In the question at hand, the two effects could be articulated as:

1. The good effect is that the people of the state that seceded would live in greater political freedom.
2. There may be several evil effects, but let’s stick to one: it may lead to civil war.

For it to be moral to pursue this course, there are four conditions which must be simultaneously met:

1. The act, in itself, must be either morally good or morally neutral. I think it’s clear that the dissolving of political bonds between one group of people and another is not in itself a moral evil. If it were, then we could never justify even a border adjustment between two countries. So this condition is clearly met.
2. The good effect must not be contingent on the evil effect occurring. That is to say, the good and evil effects must be independent, or, if they are not independent, then the evil effect must be a result of the good effect, not the other way around. In this case, the greater political freedom of the state that seceded could occur independently of whether or not the United States decided to go to war to prevent it. So this condition is met.
3. Only the good effect can be intended. I think it is clear that those who would want to secede would want to do so peacefully. So this condition, too, is met.
4. There must be a reasonable balance between the good and evil effects. In other words, it can’t be a small good and a huge evil. In my opinion, it is at least debatable whether or not this condition would be met.

So it seems that, at least from the perspective of the Principle of Double Effect, the morality of secession depends upon a careful consideration of the relative weight of the good effect and the bad effect. Would the greater peace and freedom be at least roughly equal to the damage done if a war were to ensue? You would have to consider all the effects of war, including damage to the economy, families, physical infrastructure, the damage to the rights of the residents of the seceding state who don’t want to secede, the ability of the United States to act as a force for good in the world, etc.

I don’t believe it is clear one way or the other. But if a prudential decision by the political leadership of, for example, Texas, were to decide that the good and evil effects were at least roughly equal, then they would be morally justified in pursuing that course of action.

I think if the State of Texas wanted to be a country called Texas, and it’s all done peacefully, I can’t see any harm. Unless Texas has an Army bigger than the remaining 49 states, then I don’t see any real Civil War issue at all.

The Country of Texas could prepare a series of Treaties.

1. We will come to the aid of the existing United States in times of war.
2. We will have free trade between all the other States.
3. The American Federal Government might get a wake-up call that (A) it is filled with special interest groups and battalions of lobbyists who mostly don’t care about anything but pushing their own agendas. (B) The average guy is at the bottom of the list.
4. I think many, many people think the US Government is run the wrong way and has reached a point where some people think it’s only about money and power. Look at Wall Street 2008. In 2012, the worst the crooks will get are dollar fines - zero jail time.
5. Divest from Wall Street. Create your own currency. And have just taxes. Sure, we’ll take “Federal Reserve Notes,” but to the degree that we can become independent of paying the “Federal Reserve” any interest, that will be gone. The IRS will be gone. The National Bank of Texas, not Wall Street, will take care of your money.

All investors will have to pass a strict review, with public (name removed by moderator)ut.

1. Sign on to cooperate with the FBI, Homeland Security and any criminal investigations the government can show cause for, and we’ll do the rest.

Peace,
Ed

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I think if the State of Texas wanted to be a country called Texas, and it’s all done peacefully, I can’t see any harm. Unless Texas has an Army bigger than the remaining 49 states, then I don’t see any real Civil War issue at all.

The Country of Texas could prepare a series of Treaties.

1. We will come to the aid of the existing United States in times of war.
2. We will have free trade between all the other States.
3. The American Federal Government might get a wake-up call that (A) it is filled with special interest groups and battalions of lobbyists who mostly don’t care about anything but pushing their own agendas. (B) The average guy is at the bottom of the list.
4. I think many, many people think the US Government is run the wrong way and has reached a point where some people think it’s only about money and power. Look at Wall Street 2008. In 2012, the worst the crooks will get are dollar fines - zero jail time.
5. Divest from Wall Street. Create your own currency. And have just taxes. Sure, we’ll take “Federal Reserve Notes,” but to the degree that we can become independent of paying the “Federal Reserve” any interest, that will be gone. The IRS will be gone. The National Bank of Texas, not Wall Street, will take care of your money.

All investors will have to pass a strict review, with public (name removed by moderator)ut.

1. Sign on to cooperate with the FBI, Homeland Security and any criminal investigations the government can show cause for, and we’ll do the rest.

Peace,
Ed

Well, Texas has been a Republic before…and could be again…I like your blueprint.

 

[andrewstx]

I could say something equally ridiculous, such as that in my Democrat-controlled city, I am becoming more and more afraid to live here, as a non-minority. I see “them” practically running down people of my color on the highways in their Priuses. “They” probably won’t send people like me to FEMA camps, but I am not sure…



Come on, snap out of it.

TheRealJuliane: I was trying tp reconciliatory, and I faild miserrably, sorry RJA.

 

[pnewton]

I’m from Wisconsin. And my Wisconsinite opinion is I’d give Texas back to Mexico.

Just saying…

The United States did not get Texas from Mexico. The statement makes as much sense as Canada saying they want to give the United States back to England.

 

[GEddie]

Well, Texas has been a Republic before…and could be again…I like your blueprint.

I think your point 1) needs some revision. What would be the point of secession if the T2R would be part of all the USA’s interventionist warfare anyhow? That would defeat the purpose.

And I would also hope that it could shrug off most of the security-state appurtenances of the current USA. Sure, cooperate with them, but don’t recreate post-2001 America in miniature.

And what do you mean by “all investors” being vetted via “public approval”? Is everybody who buys stocks in the T2R going to be investigated by the TSEC??

I don’t agree with secession. But if it were to happen (it will not), I would hope at least that the T2R and it’s people could get a reset toward foreign peace and citizen freedom, something that we in the USA have blown into the 2100s at least.

ICXC NIKA

 

[TimeEntrance]

The United States did not get Texas from Mexico. The statement makes as much sense as Canada saying they want to give the United States back to England.

Texas used to belong to Mexico. So, yeah, the United States could give it back. We could sell it for a buck twenty five and a used Buick. That or a kilo of cocaine.

Think of the benefits to the Texans. Those overpriced hats (cowboy hats that cost more than used cars) and dung kicking boots will dramatically drop in price.

But that’s just one idea from Wisconsin. Don’t send the Texas Rangers after me [shivers with fear].

(As a side note when the Mexicans and white Catholics saw all the Protestant “Texans” increasingly moving unto their land they thought an apocalypse of barbarians had descended upon them. Also, I’ve read that the original Texas Rangers, a rowdy and rugged bunch, used to dance with each other under moonlight and camp fire, like men and women do. Just thought those interesting historical notes about Texas that I’ve read.)

 

[TheRealJuliane]

TheRealJuliane: I was trying tp reconciliatory, and I faild miserrably, sorry RJA.

Apology accepted, and all good wishes to you on this Thanksgiving Day.

 

[Reep]

The Country of Texas could prepare a series of Treaties.

1. We will come to the aid of the existing United States in times of war.
2. We will have free trade between all the other States.

Hey Ed:

***Number 2 would be terrific. ***

Number 1 would be a disaster, one of the very things I wish this country could avoid: entangling foreign alliances. If I did want an alliance that could force me into war, the VERY LAST COUNTRY I’d want such an agreement with would be the United States of America, lest I should be at war forever.

No, I would want an agreement with all my neighbors that provided: 1) for totally free trade; and 2) that each should leave the other in peace with no meddling in one another’s affairs. With a foreign policy like that, I suspect the number of people around the globe that hate my country and want to attack us would be sharply reduced.

Happy Thanksgiving, everybody!

 

[andrewstx]

The United States did not get Texas from Mexico. The statement makes as much sense as Canada saying they want to give the United States back to England.

The USA got texas from texas.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I’m interested in reading your opinions, moral analysis I mean, on secession, as a solution/response to the crisis in the United States (its societal evils , economic failing, political attacks on religious freedom, and militarism).

Is this incompatible with the principle that we are, in general, to obey government authorities?

The devil you get may be worse than the one you have. I know that is hard to believe but it has to be considered as a real possibility.

 

[pnewton]

Texas used to belong to Mexico. So, yeah, the United States could give it back.

The Eastern States used to belong to England. How about we start by giving that back. Wisconsin we can let go back to the natives it was taken from.

Texas joined the United States as an independent nation, in case you absent that day in school.

 

[Robert_Sock]

I believe in a New World Order that unites nations and peoples. I believe that division is at its lowest point that it’s going to get.

 

[GEddie]

I believe in a New World Order that unites nations and peoples. I believe that division is at its lowest point that it’s going to get.

We are on the same page, amigo.

People who see flags and visas as the solution to societal conflict forget that in the course of time, military lines will replace them.

ICXC NIKA

 

[TimeEntrance]

The Eastern States used to belong to England. How about we start by giving that back. Wisconsin we can let go back to the natives it was taken from.

Texas joined the United States as an independent nation, in case you absent that day in school.

Wisconsin makes a fine addition to the United States of America. The East Coast states provide more usefulness to the Union as a whole than that barren land called Texas does.

I like California but I’d give L.A. to Mexico too. Texas and L.A. both auctioned off. Maybe for a good bottle of Tequila.

Actually, I’m only partly joking. There are parts of Texas in real life I think I would probably like. San Antonio gives me the impression of a nice city I’d probably enjoy living in. But I just like poking fun at Texas and L.A.

(Cowboy hats are overpriced though . Just saying…)

 

[pnewton]

Wisconsin makes a fine addition to the United States of America. The East Coast states provide more usefulness to the Union as a whole than that barren land called Texas does.

Then in light of the Golden Rule, perhaps saying Texas should go back to Mexico was not best.

 

[andrewstx]

Wisconsin makes a fine addition to the United States of America. The East Coast states provide more usefulness to the Union as a whole than that barren land called Texas does.

I like California but I’d give L.A. to Mexico too. Texas and L.A. both auctioned off. Maybe for a good bottle of Tequila.

Actually, I’m only partly joking. There are parts of Texas in real life I think I would probably like. San Antonio gives me the impression of a nice city I’d probably enjoy living in. But I just like poking fun at Texas and L.A.

(Cowboy hats are overpriced though . Just saying…)

You havent seen Texas we have pine forests, beaches, rolling plains like the Mid West, mountians and deserts with sand dunes all in the same state.

With hats you get what you pay for. I have a $250 Resistol on made of beaver fur.

But you can get a cheap wool hat for 20 bucks. I have hats over 20 years old, they are an investment.

 

[TimeEntrance]

Then in light of the Golden Rule, perhaps saying Texas should go back to Mexico was not best.

Eh… people poke at each others states all the time. Most people on the East and West Coasts only think there are cows in Wisconsin. Don’t take it so personal.

Plus, apparently some Texans want to leave the Union anyways. Apparently, they don’t care all that much about staying in union with the state of Wisconsin or the other 48 states of the Union.

If they don’t mind leaving unity with Wisconsin and the United States as a whole then I don’t mind considering auctioning Texas off to Mexico. You both have rattlesnakes anyways. Both like to ride horses. Both like to sing songs around campfires.

 

[TimeEntrance]

You havent seen Texas we have pine forests, beaches, rolling plains like the Mid West, mountians and deserts with sand dunes all in the same state.

With hats you get what you pay for. I have a $250 Resistol on made of beaver fur.

But you can get a cheap wool hat for 20 bucks. I have hats over 20 years old, they are an investment.

I stand correct then, Andrew.

Truth be told… if I moved to Texas I would probably adapt to the local culture and dress in some similar fashion.

Plus, the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders always did look pretty nice.

 

[GEddie]

I stand correct then, Andrew.

Truth be told… if I moved to Texas I would probably adapt to the local culture and dress in some similar fashion.

Plus, the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders always did look pretty nice.

Headgear being a necessity of life around here due to our ferocious sun, “cowboy” type hats are available around here in a broad price range. Most hats you see on heads around here cost far less than $250.

Texas has eleven climatic zones, and cannot be broadly described as “barren.”

ICXC NIKA