Patterico's Pontifications

2/18/2014

Racist Pro-Slavery New Yorkers Discuss Secession

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:39 am

The Washington Times reports that there is a secession movement afoot in New York State. Oh, it’s nothing so extreme as wanting the entire state to secede from a country that has taken on debt that can never be paid off. The New Yorkers behind this movement simply want the state government to be split into two regional governments: one for New York City and one for everybody else.

The reason? Racism and pro-slavery sentiment.

What? Isn’t that the only reason that one unit of a government might want to secede from a larger unit?

No, I am of course making that up; the real reason is that New York City and the rest of the state tend to see things very differently. Kind of like L.A. and San Francisco see things differently from much of the rest of California. Or, to put a finer point on it, the way that states like Texas see things differently from the blue states.

But, of course, if someone were to suggest that, say, Texas secede, that person would be labeled a crazy Neo-Confederate (whatever that means). The idea that a state — the unit of government that was originally considered sovereign when the Constitution was formed — might want to withdraw from the compact it entered? Slavery racism slavery we fought a war over this SLAVERY!!!! is the response. You’re crazy to even mention it.

I think states have the right to secede. If I still lived in Texas, I think I would want it to secede.

Aside from the impossible politics of it, I see one very large practical problem. The reason that Texans should want to secede, or one of them, is the absurd debt that the country has run up. But Texas at least theoretically helped do that, and when a group of entities incur a debt, one of them can’t simply leave without first paying their share. And since this debt can never be paid, individually or collectively, because it is already far too large, that means that no state can leave without first paying an impossible-to-pay sum.

So we’re all stuck. Unless someone can figure a way out.

Sorry. I know I need to go flog myself for supposedly being a racist and pro-slavery Neo-Confederate for even raising the issue. I just think to myself on a regular basis: what can people do to respond to this completely absurd and completely untenable financial mess that we have worked ourselves into, which folks in Washington like Barack Obama won’t even acknowledge? Big Media may not talk about it every day, but it is still, by far, our greatest problem — every single day. If a state can’t secede its way out, then what can be done?

125 Responses to “Racist Pro-Slavery New Yorkers Discuss Secession”

  1. I really wonder how far, how bad, things have to become before people — or at least enough people — start to say “oh oh”?

    Americans fell for the corrupt (certainly ideologically), power-hungry nature of Franklin D Roosevelt during the last major period of economic stupor in the US, keeping him and his Democrat successor (who railed against conservatives on the campaign trail—and was a KKK-grade bigot/racist behind closed doors) in office well through the early 1950s.

    There’s a theory that great nations have a shelf life of around 200 years. The US is now 237 years old, and I’m wondering if this society is devoted to both testing and verifying that theory.

    Mark (3739a8)

  2. It’s like the restaurant tab. Everyone pays their share, or someone pays the whole thing (sometimes this is a “whose is bigger” thing.)

    So Texas gets up to leave, says it’s picking up the tab. Obama says “No, it’s mine!” and Texas agrees, leaving.

    htom (412a17)

  3. We could invade Angola. It’s got oil and a worse government than Iraq had.

    nk (dbc370)

  4. In my opinion the federal government created the debt and it is they who are responsible for it, not the state of Texas. They do not vote to raise the debt or to borrow money in Austin, they do it in Washington, DC. They don’t print or coin money in Austin nor do they control the Federal Reserve. I used to live in San Antonio and if Texas were to secede I’d be back there before you could say “Philly cheesesteak”.

    Hoagie (511e55)

  5. I think counties should be able to secede from this collectivist country.

    mg (31009b)

  6. Its amazing how people have no idea of history and just base what they believe off of their schooling. And its even more amazing that people don’t want to improve their knowledge.

    Patrick H (f854d7)

  7. Texas could easily sell secession bonds to China

    the Chinese LOVE to buy crappy worthless paper

    it’s a thing

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  8. And its even more amazing that people don’t want to improve their knowledge.

    ignorance is bliss, and we’re surrounded by happy people.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  9. We can’t secede right now. We need to get our gold back first.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  10. or is that salt terrorists?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  11. Whereabouts will that Texas Bullion Depository be, DRJ?

    goldfinker (dbc370)

  12. We should secede and tell Washington and the Blue States to pay the debt themselves.

    Gary (17253f)

  13. New Jerseyans are constantly whining about their traffic problems. And about the weather. If it’s not Chris Christie it’s Jeh Johnson. If it’s not Sandy it’s Hercules.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. goldfinker (any relation to goldfinger?),

    Under the 2013 bill, the comptroller would have been responsible for the Texas gold. But the bill did not get out of committee so I don’t think anyone every decided where the Texas’ version of Fort Knox would be located. It isn’t that much gold so it probably wouldn’t be too hard to protect.

    Better yet, UTIMCO could just sell the gold and we wouldn’t have to worry about the federal government levying on it. Of course, there’s still the problem with all the Texas money sitting in out-of-state banks.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  15. BTW, sorry New York and California:

    New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

    Texas? Hmm. Rebellion, I guess. Treason if war starts.

    nk (dbc370)

  16. Whereabouts will that Texas Bullion Depository be, DRJ?

    Comment by goldfinker (dbc370) — 2/18/2014 @ 8:57 am

    In the basement of the Alamo.

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  17. @2- The internet must have eaten the rest of htom’s explanation, so I will finish it for him:

    Obama slaps his Visa on the table saying, “I’ve got it!” and Texas bids a farewell. Several minutes later the waiter appears quietly at BO’s shoulder and whispers in his ear, something about card limits, won’t cover, etc. “No problem” says he and goes into the wallet for his employer’s card, which handles the amount handily. All ends well, with not much more than a sheepish grin and a quiet “I know we all talked business at some point tonight, right?”

    Tune in next week for the reading of the expense voucher and the results of the meeting with the CFO.

    gramps, the original (b18bfc)

  18. when a group of entities incur a debt, one of them can’t simply leave without first paying their share. And since this debt can never be paid, individually or collectively, because it is already far too large, that means that no state can leave without first paying an impossible-to-pay sum.

    If Texas were to be allowed to secede, could it be allowed to assume its share of the debt, as opposed to necessarily paying it all at once?

    Joshua (9ede0e)

  19. “one [] can’t simply leave without first paying their share”

    But it’s the American Way. Ask any Boomer.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  20. 16. What if the impetus is the other way around?

    Might MI be willing to part with Detroit? We already see NYC running away from providing services. Are the boroughs of remotely equal value to the City?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  21. And you’ve hit the nail on the head. We don’t want states leaving their unwanted children on our doorstep with two more Senators voting goodies for them.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. If the sticking point is contributing to debt, wouldn’t that make states like CA and NY at least in a better position due to paying far more in to the federal government than they receive?

    I understand that that doesn’t speak to absolute debt, but it at least gives them a place closer to the front of the line.

    Snip (031824)

  23. #16, nk, try squaring that language with the establishment of West Virginia.

    ropelight (5bf89f)

  24. Comment by gramps, the original (b18bfc) — 2/18/2014 @ 9:18 am

    Actually Obama merely would tell the server he just increased his own credit limit and to inform the issuer of the new limit and that he won’t negotiate the point or even discuss his non-stop spending.

    in_awe (7c859a)

  25. Many cities across the nation have accepted funding of the purchse of arms and equipment normally reserved for our military. What are they preparing for? Civil unrest and insurrection?

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  26. With China dumping their holdings of American debt, are we on the Great Precipice?

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  27. (a) nk, as I read that language, a new state can be formed within the jurisdiction of an existing state *if that existing state consents*.

    I don’t think that’s likely in either NY or CA, but at least in CA you could argue that passage of an initiative statute constitutes state consent. Although given the broken way the Supreme Court handled the CA initiative process last summer, it’s not clear how the courts would interpret the situation.

    (b) ropelight, I can’t find *any* mechanism by which the establishment of West Virginia was legal given the official position that the secession of Virginia was legally non-operative.

    aphrael (d09290)

  28. It’s not a question of the relative merits of evils. Its about retiring a disease infested tick.

    http://www.tpnn.com/2014/02/17/stockman-closing-gap-on-cornyn-in-latest-tx-senate-poll/

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  29. 28. In the unique case of CA I think the Borg will fly apart like an unbalanced wind mill in a high gale.

    As VDH points out, it has immense gifts of captive revenue sources but why will disparate reasons want to share in extremity?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  30. 30. disparate regions, Doh.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  31. Not to worry! Your California legislature has recognized the potential problems arising from the events of the past several years:

    http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/?p=7022

    Rest easy, we are within a single swarm of new policies that will fix everything. Only the richest one percent will pay. Power to the people!

    Dirty Old Man (1adf95)

  32. “I think states have the right to secede. If I still lived in Texas, I think I would want it to secede.”

    - Patterico

    I agree. I remember arguing this as an undergraduate to little avail, but the whole idea of “tacit consent” espoused by Locke (and others) has never struck me as persuasive – particularly since it seemed ultimately tied to the simple fact of territorial birth.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  33. Everybody should just start paying for their groceries and gasoline in bitcoins, or something.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  34. rob Peter pay Paul
    we have seen the enemy
    and yep it is us

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  35. If you look at county returns for California, especially on initiatives, you’ll find that the SF region stands quite alone in its politics. Even Los Angeles county can be sane from time to time, and in any event is 10-20% saner than SF.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  36. Daleyrocks – a friend of mine is a waiter at a high-end restaurant, and recently had a customer ask if they accept bitcoin. (They don’t).

    aphrael (d09290)

  37. Oh, and I support the right of the SF Bay Area to form their own state or, better yet, country. I would send them money to do so.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  38. We could invade Angola. It’s got oil and a worse government than Iraq had.

    But Iraq had MUCH better food.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  39. money so they say
    is root of Evil today
    keep yer hands off mine

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  40. a fag in San Fran
    is just a ghey in LA
    don’t mind teh maggots

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  41. 32. Obviously the water wars are going to be entertaining.

    I’m full up on pop corn, pass the Junior Mints.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  42. now just ask yerself
    what would Jimmy Brolin do?
    Teh Streisand Effect

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  43. I don’t think that’s likely in either NY or CA, but at least in CA you could argue that passage of an initiative statute constitutes state consent.

    aphrael,

    In the section on Initiatives, Referendums and Recalls, the CA state Constitution reserves the legislative power to the people. So an initiative statute could constitute the resolution required.

    The problem is that the initiative would probably have to specify the state borders and, most importantly, deal with water rights as there are several cross-state aqueducts (e.g. Owens Valley, Hetch Hetchy).

    There was an advisory vote in the 70′s or 80′s to split the state into 3 states, and it passed. Nothing was done, however. It think that water rights were an issue.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  44. Невероятно Низкие Цены на Авиабилеты.

    Сервис помогает эффективно планировать маршрут, проводит поиск дешевых цен на авиабилеты, обеспечивает удобное бронирование авиабилетов онлайн и доступные инструменты оплаты.

    Все подробности на сайте: aviareis.tk

    aviabiletnew (9005cf)

  45. It would be a sneaky way for a state to get itself 10 or 20 more Senators and Electors. It would need a friendly Congress. Let’s say the Republicans control both the House and Senate next year. Overnight, the red states vote to become 100 states, the Congress approves, 200 more Republican Senators, maybe as many as 100 more Republican Representatives. What do you guys think?

    nk (dbc370)

  46. BTW, I expect California to split into 3 or 4 states within the next 20 years. The state has 12% of the US population and several distinct regional cultures. Both the size and the hostile factions make it ungovernable as it stands.

    Assuming that the state can agree on a split, Congress ought to go along so long as the Senate balance wasn’t upset too greatly (the seats would likely go to 3-3 (4-2 dem?) or 4-4 under any likely split).

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  47. aphrael – I hope you know I was kidding.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  48. nk,

    For Maine or Nebraska to split into 12 stares would probably be unsupportable, but California getting 6 or 8 Senators would still leave it, population-wise, well shy of parity.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  49. *states

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  50. Saw a wonderful Burmashave series of signs posted in a farmer’s field along SB I-5 in between Lodi and Sacramento… all directed at Gov. Jerry “Grandpa Simpson” Brown’s shenanigans vis-a-vis the water tunnels, i.e., draining the Sac-SJ Delta to provide water to a thirsty SoCal

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  51. As far as Texas seceding, I’m against it. I don’t know if they have the right, but it would sure eff the rest of us.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  52. Haiku–

    Actually I think we should divert Hetch Hetchy water from SF to the delta to save the smelt.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  53. Kevin M – I can imagine opponents of the division alleging in federal court that, under the Guaranty Clause, this kind of legislative power is reserved to actual physical legislators (rather than the people via initiative). Prior to June I would have said this was a losing argument, but after _Perry_ I’m not sure.

    aphrael (f46ee5)

  54. Wouldn’t bother me one bit, Kevin. Let ‘em drink salt water in SF.

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  55. As for SoCal, ya wanna live in the desert, build some de-salinization plants!

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  56. Recycle teh water I see running in the street gutters every time I visit.

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  57. If Texas were to secede — and I think that’s unlikely — then the tricky problem isn’t Texas’ share of the federal debt. The problem is what would happen to Texas/Texans’ real and personal property in other states and to federal property in Texas like U.S. military installations and national parks. Fortunately the United States refused to accept Texas property when it entered the Union in 1845, so the federal government doesn’t own as much of Texas as it does in other western states.

    My guess is that, in addition to threatening military action against Texas, the federal government would immediately freeze any Texas/Texans’ property outside Texas and apply it to the federal debt — all of it, state property and that of its citizens, and not just Texas’ “share” of the debt but all the debt — on the theory that the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to a state or its citizens if they attempt to secede. That would be ironic, wouldn’t it? You can’t secede but you will lose your safety and your rights if you try.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  58. I also think Texas has a few Robert E. Lee’s at its military installations — military leaders who might reluctantly put their state ahead of their country. I would hate that to happen, just as I would hate to think of Americans fighting each other. Secession is serious business but it’s on a suprising percentage of American minds.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  59. rumor spreadin’ ’round
    ’bout that shack outside La Grange
    where teh air is fine

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  60. most every time
    but I might be mistaken
    a-how how how how

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  61. If you look at county returns for California, especially on initiatives, you’ll find that the SF region stands quite alone in its politics. Even Los Angeles county can be sane from time to time, and in any event is 10-20% saner than SF.

    San Francisco is a small island of ultra-liberalism, in theory (or in terms of smugness and attitude), if not in practice (ie, “champagne socialism”).

    Only thing that prevents SF from going down the drain like the city of Detroit is a combination of both good ol’ fashioned capitalism (ie, the price of housing and how that either lures in or detracts people based on their income and education) and, in turn, demographics.

    The more liberal a city or country becomes, the more crucial is the nature of its populace. Or the latter — meaning the number of people who are somewhat resourceful, skilled and talented — will be the only saving grace of a community or society. But if a city or nation is 0 and 2, then fuggedabout it.

    Still, politics and ideology may ultimately have the upper hand. Argentina is one of the most mono-racial nations in the Americas, has among the highest percentage of people of European ancestry in this part of the world, yet it routinely is both an economic and social basket case, with reportedly high rates of crime. So if 90-plus percent of people in current-day Detroit were moderate to conservative — instead of rabidly leftwing — they very well might kick the butt of an Argentina.

    Mark (3739a8)

  62. Largely off topic, apart from using the word “debt” and mentioning the US Treasury: Will China shake the world again?
    Summary: Back in ’08, China was on the verge of a collapse (like everyone else). But the Chinese government had the banks dump all kinds of money on it (with the encouragement of the US), so the economy kept growing like crazy.
    Now the economists are saying it looks like China just bought a few years, and its economy is slowing. The Chinese government is planning to halve the growth (7-8% currently, reduced to 4%), but things might not work that way: they might not be able to slow down the lending, or the cut growth rate may be too low.

    Ibidem (5de107)

  63. @18 & @25, gramps & in_awe. Playing the part of Texas in my mind, I neither noticed nor cared what happened to 0′s credit card. Didn’t imagine anything. Probably would have involved a sexy young Chinese waitperson of indeterminate gender telling 0 his card had been declined, and asking FLOTUS if she would care to pay, please?

    htom (412a17)

  64. “San Francisco is a small island of ultra-liberalism, in theory (or in terms of smugness and attitude), if not in practice (ie, “champagne socialism”).”

    Mark – Funny thing is if you take a look at county maps of other blue states you will often see the same phenomenon you see in California, that the highest population density urban areas are the most liberal, while other parts of the states actually elect Republicans from time to time or consistently until districts get gerrymandered. It’s a thing.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  65. Map of SF Bay Area…

    http://bobbiblogger.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/sf.jpg

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  66. R.I.P. Bob Casale, guitarist/keyboardist, founding/longtime member of DEVO

    Icy (b22f5c)

  67. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

    What’s the condescending ‘sorry’ for, nk? There is no need for components of California or New York to constitute themselves as a new state. What is needed are new state constitutions which reconstitute the state in question as a confederation of components. Each component would have its own government and law codes. There would be some spare filaments connecting the components: perhaps a periodic convention of municipal councillors which would serve to propose constitutional amendments, a small standing secretariat to such a body, a joint board of elections, and a court of last resort constituted ex officio from the appellate courts of the two components. The only statewide elections you would have to have would be for U.S. Senators and presidential electors.

    There are a number of states which are today assemblages of incompatible parts or demographic behemoths. These states could benefit from a confederal organization. Among them would be Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, Illinois, Florida, Georgia, Texas, California, and Minnesota.

    Art Deco (ee8de5)

  68. 39. We could invade Angola. It’s got oil and a worse government than Iraq had.

    But Iraq had MUCH better food.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/18/2014 @ 10:52 am

    Whoa. Slow down, pilgrim. You’re riding too fast.

    I bet Angola has damned good food. The other former Portuguese colony Mozambique does.

    http://www.fab-chili-recipes.com/mozambique-chicken-piri-piri-marinadesauce.html

    I’ve not tried it. By the way, the beer in Namibia is excellent. But then it’s a former German colony. I bet it’d go great with the following.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angolan_cuisine

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  69. DRJ,

    How does a country that lectures the world on the right of peoples to self-determination turn around and brutally suppress such a determination? Assuming more than token resistance, there would be 10s of thousands of dead, mostly civilians, and untold destruction.

    Shipping all the illegals home in boxcars would be more palatable.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  70. http://www.windhoekbeer.com.na/index.html

    It goes well with Boerewors.

    http://www.biltongbox.com/boer.shtml

    I think it’d be just the thing with frango pirri pirri.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  71. I bet the beer in Iraq is lousy, BTW.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  72. Comment by aphrael (d09290) — 2/18/2014 @ 10:27 am

    (b) ropelight, I can’t find *any* mechanism by which the establishment of West Virginia was legal given the official position that the secession of Virginia was legally non-operative.

    Abraham Lincoln deliberately left the question of whether or not a secession was valid unsettled because he wanted to have it both ways. Why resolve it one way or the other he said in January 1865 (I think) about Louisiana. I can”t find the quote.

    But in the case of West Virginia you could argue that Virginia seceding, and pulling its Representatives from Congress, or attempting to, constituted its consent.

    Senator Andrew Johnson of Tennessee refused to accept the secession of Tennessee, and in 1864 he was put on the national ticket with Abraham Lincoln.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  73. “There is no need for components of California or New York to constitute themselves as a new state. What is needed are new state constitutions which reconstitute the state in question as a confederation of components. Each component would have its own government and law codes.”

    Art Deco – I’m in agreement with this approach. For external governance matters there is essentially no change. For internal matters, New York essentially subdivides itself. Who cares except the state residents who now have a legislative structure more responsive to their needs.

    New York in effect has a holding company for the entire state with two downstream subsidiaries – one for self-important metrosexual hipster douchebags in the NYC Metro area who feel like they are the center of the universe, and another for the rest of the state.

    Piece of cake. Internal state problem. Easy peasy lemon squeasy.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  74. If you want to see how California breaks down politically, county by county, here is a good set of maps from the Nov 2010 election.

    http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-general/maps/

    You can see that the SF bay area is notably to the left of everyone else. Even Los Angeles county is close to the state average.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  75. DRJ – Regarding the Texas gold reserves, did Glenn Beck claim they have gone missing along with the German gold reserves?

    I’m still waiting for updates on that conspiracy theory.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  76. A lot of things happened between 1861 and about 1870 that weren’t quite legal.

    You had states not considered readmitted to the Union (their representatives in the House not seated) but yet considered members of the union for the purpose of ratifying constitutional amendments.

    In fact, ratification of the 13th and 14th Amendments became conditions for seating their members in Congress.

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0194016.html

    State Seceded from Union / Readmitted to Union 1

    1. South Carolina Dec. 20, 1860 / July 9, 1868

    2. Mississippi Jan. 9, 1861 / Feb. 23, 1870

    3. Florida Jan. 10, 1861 / June 25, 1868

    4. Alabama Jan. 11, 1861 / July 13, 1868

    5. Georgia Jan. 19, 1861 / July 15, 18702

    6. Louisiana Jan. 26, 1861 / July 9, 1868

    7. Texas March 2, 1861 / March 30, 1870

    8. Virginia April 17, 1861 / Jan. 26, 1870

    9. Arkansas May 6, 1861 / June 22, 1868

    10. North Carolina May 20, 1861 / July 4, 1868

    11. Tennessee June 8, 1861 / July 24, 1866

    NOTE: Four other slave states—Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri—remained in the Union. The latter two were actually represented on the Confederate flag, which, like the Stars and Stripes, featured a star for every state.

    1. Date of readmission to representation in U.S. House of Representatives.

    2. Second readmission date. First date was July 21, 1868, but the representatives were unseated March 5, 1869.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  77. The separation of Maine from Massachusetts in 1820 into a separate state was done completely legally.

    But the admission of Maine got hung up in Congress over the number of slave states and free states (which they were already counting) and resulted in the Missouri compromise.

    In 1836/37 Michigan was paired with Arkansas.

    Texas and Florida were compensated for with Iowa and Wisconsin.

    After that they ran out of slave states.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  78. The idea that the Southern Confederacy was about States Rights is one of the biggest political con games ever perpetrated on the common man by his so-called betters. The Plantation Aristocrats has used the advantages that the institution of Slavery granted them to push around the rest of the country – including their less affluent white neighbors. When it became clear that the North was gradually putting together the political oomph to take some degree of control, they pouted and, in essence, said “If you won’t play my way, i’ll take the ball and go home”.

    Now, if they had ever show any signs of giving a fat damn about States Rights, I might have some sympathy for them. But if the Southern States have a right to practice Slavery then the Northern States have the right to declare Slaves to be contraband, and confiscate them from their owners when they are brought (or wander) North. And if the Northern States decide that the way to dispose of said Contraband is to release it into its own custody, that is none of the Southern States’ damn business. And there goes the Fugitive Slave Act.

    The Plantation Aristocrats conned the southern rank and file into fighting to preserve the Plantations’ advantage. And after the War, the Sought has persistently held to the idea that the War was about something other than a bunch of would-be aristocrats finally getting the drubbing they so richly deserved.

    C. S. P. Schofield (e8b801)

  79. daleyrocks,

    I have no idea what Glenn Beck said about the gold, but I think there was some mystery about where the gold was. My recollection is it wasn’t at the Federal Reserve as originally reported. Instead, it was in an HSBC vault.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  80. Confirmed. Angola has it all over Iraq.

    The beaches are some of the best in Africa. And the music is a lot better.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lbih4Xsg9s

    Angola Benguela – QUANDO EU FUI A BENGUELA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NN5WokiShQ

    Angola Benguela – Luxury Semba

    And the girls can shake it like that without worrying about some 7th century Islamic knuckle dragger issuing a fatwa or trying to behead or blow them up.

    I’m already looking for real estate.

    Well, maybe in Namibia.

    Swakopmund has much to recommend. And the fact it’s on the Skeleton coast (whoever named it that was a real estate genius) keeps the riffraff away.

    http://www.lonelyplanet.com/namibia/western-namibia/swakopmund

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  81. The hunting is way better in either Angola or Namibia than Iraq. Too bad these guys are off the menu.

    http://angolafieldgroup.com/palanca-negra/

    Iraq? What are you guys, nuts?

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  82. It’s only because of racisty racism that I wish my Preezy was Hifikepunye Lucas Pohamba.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  83. I’m thinking, live in Namibia. Take over Angola as a weekend place. At least until we get the place fixed up.

    Who’s with me?

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  84. The irony would be lost on New Yorkers, especially the lily-white trust fund babies who occupy themselves at cocktail parties and art shows in Tribeca and SoHo.

    The other salient point here is that money talks and bullshit walks. The five boroughs drain a ghastly sum of resources from the rest of the state, not even including the federal resources imbued in welfare, unemployment insurance and medicaid. As we continue our steep decline into a de facto third world banana republic, these dichotomies will become even more pronounced.

    The NYC-NYS divide will pale in comparison to the LA-SF-Sacramento-California divides, the Detroit-Michigan schisms, the Philly-Pittsburgh-PA divides and the Chicago-Ill. schisms.

    Ultimately we’ll look a lot like South Africa or Brazil. Tiny, fortified concentrations of extreme and largely-inherited wealth surrounded by vast hordes of misery, crime, poverty, despair and dependency. Politics and policies have severe consequences.

    Lawrence Westlake (4fc30a)

  85. “I have no idea what Glenn Beck said about the gold, but I think there was some mystery about where the gold was.”

    DRJ – Maybe it’s in the FEMA camps. :)

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  86. it’s not in sochi that’s for sure lol stupid american olympic failuremonkeys

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  87. It’s only a matter of time until there will be a sale of U.S.Bonds that nobody attends, or bids for.
    We can then repudiate the debt, and the Several States can disengage as they wish.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  88. “it’s not in sochi that’s for sure lol stupid american olympic failuremonkeys”

    Mr. Feets – It’s not in my pocket neither.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  89. The idea that the Southern Confederacy was about States Rights is one of the biggest political con games ever perpetrated on the common man by his so-called betters. The Plantation Aristocrats has used the advantages that the institution of Slavery granted them to push around the rest of the country – including their less affluent white neighbors. When it became clear that the North was gradually putting together the political oomph to take some degree of control, they pouted and, in essence, said “If you won’t play my way, i’ll take the ball and go home”.

    Now, if they had ever show any signs of giving a fat damn about States Rights, I might have some sympathy for them. But if the Southern States have a right to practice Slavery then the Northern States have the right to declare Slaves to be contraband, and confiscate them from their owners when they are brought (or wander) North. And if the Northern States decide that the way to dispose of said Contraband is to release it into its own custody, that is none of the Southern States’ damn business. And there goes the Fugitive Slave Act.

    The Plantation Aristocrats conned the southern rank and file into fighting to preserve the Plantations’ advantage. And after the War, the Sought has persistently held to the idea that the War was about something other than a bunch of would-be aristocrats finally getting the drubbing they so richly deserved.

    Well, far be it from me to crank this up to an argument, but I will point out a few facts that you appear to have — for some reason — overlooked or apparently don’t quite understand.

    As our fearless leader, Mr. P. has correctly noted: “The idea that a state — the unit of government that was originally considered sovereign when the Constitution was formed — might want to withdraw from the compact it entered?” (Emphasis mine.)

    Would you think that it ridiculous or impossible — although admittedly politically difficult — for Germany to opt out of the E.U.? Why? It’s a sovereign state and it has every right to change its mind. When it becomes a member of a European super-state, then things are different (presuming that this new super-states’ constitution dissolves the national boundaries within Europe.) The southern states as sovereign states — I would recommend that you stop trying to see things with post-Civil War glasses — also had every right to secede as they were considered by the Founders to be sovereign states. They made this point quite clear, time and again. Though there is no mechanism for secession in the Constitution, there is nothing to prevent it, either. Even more to the point, there’s nothing in the Constitution that authorizes, let alone authorizes, force to be used to keep states within the political union. Again, if you were to look at the situation with respect to the operation of the powers of the federal government vis-a-vis the states prior to 1860, the fed didn’t exercise much authority over the states because it was not constitutionally designed to do so. The Constitution was looked upon, at the time, as framing the specific, limited powers of the federal government and the rest of the political power and administration was left to the states (viz., the 10th Amendment.) I don’t know how much clearer it gets than that.

    I’m sure as hell not going to defend the landed interests of the South in maintaining slavery, though I would point out that the vast majority of the Southern army did not consist of conscripts or the gentry class. But hey, propaganda is propaganda and, again, I’m not here to argue. The fundamental fact to consider is that the issue of slavery was an inherent contradiction in a nation founded on individual “liberty” and one that the Founders found politically expedient to punt down the road, much like our own behavior with respect to the inevitable outcome of our own sordid experiments in socialism. But with, I believe, around 600,000 dead on both sides, the nation indeed got what it deserved. Unfortunately. Neither side is morally clean in this respect.

    It was also unfortunate that the constitutionally correct and politically advantageous concept of States’ Rights was so identified with so distasteful and horrid an institution as slavery. Had States’ Rights retained its rightful place in constitutional law, it (as was designed) would have made the adoption of socialism within our nation a much more difficult goal to achieve.

    By the way, have you ever wondered why, out of all of the nations bordering on the Atlantic that did, in fact, do away with slavery early in the 19th Century, why was the U.S. the only one of those nations that went to (large-scale) civil war over it? My theory, oddly enough, is that it had to do with — of all things — the fact that we had States’ Rights operating as a political principle within our republican form of government. That is, all of the other nations — from Brazil to Britain — all had (more or less) of a national (federal) government that dealt with the issue for the entire nation and, invariably, most of these countries implemented some form of governmental compensation for the slave owners over a given time frame that was authorized by its national (federal) government. In the U.S., there was no strong federal government in the mid-19th Century, hence, there was no way that slave owners were going to get compensated.

    The North had desired political unity in order to achieve independence but the cost was the legal continuation of slavery in ALL of the union. They made the same deal again when the Constitution was passed. And again, when the Bill of Rights was passed. For all of their righteous bluster about the evils of slavery from the North, they were not willing to put their own money where their mouths were and pay the Southern slave owners compensation to end slavery. And the slave owners, considering how economically valuable (at the time) the slave labor was to them, were not about to free the slaves.

    Consider also if the factions had managed to delay their combat for the next 25 years. By that time, mechanized farming would have come into being and slavery would have become technologically obsolete. Then what do you think would’ve happened?

    J.P. (bd0246)

  90. J.P.

    I’m not arguing that States Rights are not a respectable issue. I’m arguing that they are a respectable issue on which the Plantation Aristocrats had no claim whatsoever. They didn’t respect the Rights of the Northern States, or they wouldn’t have pushed through the Fugitive Slave Act. They wanted THEIR PREROGATIVES to rule over the rights of others, and persuaded the commoners of the South to fight under that banner with a lot of self-righteous bushwa.

    C. S. P. Schofield (e8b801)

  91. Icy… Say it ain’t so! Devo was just about the greatest live act ever back in their heyday. It was like what I imagine attending a Nazi yute rally was like. Now the original drummer Meyers and one of teh Casales.

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  92. a fitting tribute…

    http://youtu.be/uqoH4rvXxpU

    Colonel Haiku (f2ae7d)

  93. There is a bit of conflation to say that splitting NYC from NYS is the same as rebellions of the Civil War. NYC would still be part of the United States, it just would not be part of NYS.
    That is a rather significant difference, and there are many such movements throughout the United States.

    As for “states rights”:
    States (which is to say, governments) don’t have rights.
    States have powers.
    People have rights.
    Where states have rights, people don’t.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  94. Sammy, those dates are silly. The 13th amendment was considered ratified in 1865 and the 14th amendment was declared ratified before the first southern state was readmitted.

    The requirement to ratify was solely so that there would be no confusion on the point later. And, frankly, the South got off pretty easy — there were folks in the North who wanted to hang all the slaveowners and rebel officers.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  95. BTW, if Texas was to secede, why wouldn’t they offset their portion of the debt with the present value of entitlements their citizens would be forgoing? Just think how solid SS and Medicare become if 10% of the working population, having paid in, collects nothing in the end.

    If even 5 million Texans in their 40s-60s get nothing after having paid in bunches, that’s over $2 trillion the US will not have to pay out just for SS, let alone Medicare. One would assume that those who are already receiving SS would continue to get it, but that was going to happen in any event. If the Feds welched on that, too, they’d save an other trillion or two.

    So the debt issue isn’t an issue.

    Even if it was, Texas would issue US$ denominated bonds, fully expecting to pay them back for pennies on the dollar after US inflation.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  96. I think Texas would take that deal, Kevin M. I know I would.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  97. 87. The idea that a seceding State would want to continue doing business with the former USA is apparent enough, but dumping the legal overhead of our Federal overseers is most of the attraction of secession.

    Before business as usual is taken up, lots of killing, starvation and property destruction has to occur.

    We may be getting ahead of ourselves. Am I wrong?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  98. This is a very interesting article about the bay area of California and Detroit. It poses the question, will progressive governance turn northern California into Detroit? I have several friends/business acquaintances in NoCal to whom I’d dearly love to send this article –you know, to get their impression of it. But I’m asceered to.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/371271/golden-gated-communities-kevin-d-williamson

    elissa (d711a1)

  99. 97. Cont. Any effort on the part of the Feds to represent their fiscal obligations as likely to be paid is absurd.

    They are defaulting as we speak.

    Offer 10 cents on the dollar as your final position. Tell them to go f*ck themselves as your opener.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  100. Will there be a barbed wall around the seceeded Texas? I’m trying to understand the logistics here.

    elissa (d711a1)

  101. the sheer embarrassment of being a grotesquely indebted ludicrously cowardly failsh*t american should be more than enough to fuel an ardent secession movement in all but the most already-spanked-into-submission states

    nobody wants to be on a team of LOSERS

    nobody

    except various “olympians” but most of them can’t even read

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  102. The F-35 is just the tip of the iceberg.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-18/us-navy-frigate-runs-aground-amid-sochi-overwatch-black-sea

    Why should a seceding State honor anything done on its behalf by these clusterf*cks.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  103. yes yes yes a fearsome wall with dogs

    dogs with names like shep and clementine and rufus and pickleninny

    also, giant robots

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  104. 101. As in Olympia, WA?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  105. The walls of Texas are the men of Texas.

    nk (dbc370)

  106. No, nk, you misheard that… it’s the BALLS of Texas are the men…

    Colonel Haiku (250a94)

  107. Don’t they teach anything in schools these days?
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_was_Sparta_the_only_city-state_without_walls

    nk (dbc370)

  108. The Onion envisions a very big fence, elissa.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  109. The Austin fence is an especially nice touch.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  110. Austin is the Davis, CA of Texas.

    Colonel Haiku (250a94)

  111. That’s funny, DRJ. Thanks.

    elissa (d711a1)

  112. This is a very interesting article about the bay area of California and Detroit.

    Very interesting essay, and if I didn’t know better, I’d think my comments above were influenced by having already read it.

    My only quibble is the writer of the National Review article, Kevin Williamson, has to be careful — and this may sound ironic coming from me — to not overstate the role of the purely political and purely governmental in shaping the long-term success (or failure) of a place, be it a San Francisco or a Detroit. There obviously are a variety of both assets and liabilities that come into play when trying to figure the future success or failure of any city or country, with the liberalism or conservatism (or “centrism”) of a people being only part of the equation.

    For instance, if Detroit had a climate similar to San Francisco’s, with few to no days of very harsh weather, that certainly would need to be factored into that city’s current and future prognosis. Then again, much of Mexico has a comparatively benign climate, yet it’s hardly a land of milk and honey.

    Beyond that — and most of the posts in the message board under Williamson’s article do focus on ideology instead of race — when thinking of Detroit, it’s important to immediately think of monolithic liberalism and not race. That’s why it would be interesting for someone like Williamson to compare the city of Detroit — with all its loony liberalism/leftism — with the nation of Argentina, with all its loony liberalism/leftism.

    Mark (0553f9)

  113. The Onion envisions a very big fence, elissa.

    Yeah, if I wait to go back until they secede, I am screwed. No chance they’re letting a Californian in.

    All I can do is hope someone vouches for me. DRJ??

    Patterico (9c670f)

  114. I love the following post in the readers forum of nationalreview.com. It nicely embodies the true nature of so many “limousine liberals.”

    nationalreview.com, alioh61, February 17: It remains to be seen if a city like San Francisco will go the way of Detroit. The city has more rich Liberals per capita than just about any other town in the country. There is nothing wrong with this unless you compare their politics to what they have achieved in their lives.

    They are wealthy because of Capitalism, a dirty word in places like San Francisco.

    They moan about poverty, but don’t expect them to let their home devaluate by putting in section eight housing down the street.

    They believe we all live in racial harmony, yet live in areas that are Lilly white.

    They love the Environment, but have pools and jacuzzis that take gallon after gallon of precious water, massive homes that take tons of energy to run and gas loving luxury automobiles (they may have a Smart Car as a symbol of how much they are down with the fight, but if they are expected to travel any distance, don’t expect them to use it).

    They hate the police, but will call them in a minute if they see an African American man hanging around their homes.

    They bemoan the unfairness of America while living the American Dream.

    They fancy themselves lovers of wild life, while birds in the thousands are killed by wind farms (and don’t expect to have a wind farm anywhere near them because they are loud and could spoil their precious views).

    I could go on, but what’s the point? It’s easy to look down from your Ivory Tower and not give one darn thought to how you got there. You’ve got yours so it’s easy to vote for those who would put hurdle after hurdle in front of those struggling to be upwardly mobile.

    Mark (0553f9)

  115. “That’s why it would be interesting for someone like Williamson to compare the city of Detroit — with all its loony liberalism/leftism — with the nation of Argentina, with all its loony liberalism/leftism.”

    Mark – To me it might actually be more interesting if you took at stab at looking at the history of Argentina and tried to figure out why it is the way it is today when it was heading in a much different direction not much more than 100 years ago.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  116. What is the way out for anybody who has been allowed by lenders to overextend themselves? You declare bankruptcy. The bankruptcy proceedings divide your assets among your creditors leaving you with a bare minimum needed to live. And then the person must work hard to rebuild a thoroughly trashed reputation and regain respect after baring their extreme shame to the world.

    What is the “bare minimum” the US needs to have to live on? Then what can we pay our creditors? Once we determine that we know how much we must inflate our currency so we can pay off at least the minimum amount of our debt without utterly destroying ourselves.

    Hey, this is really extreme. But it’s the only way out I can think of. (And the minimum wage increase is step one in the inflation process, the road to cheaper dollars.)

    {O.O} For the last 40 years every time I think of this subject this is all that comes out as a way out that our damnfool elected officials would find acceptable. Chopping government into a small fraction if what exists today is the right way to do it. Chop it to no more than is listed in the Constitution but leave SSI and Medicare (mostly) in place to avoid an utter elder-disaster and we MIGHT be able to pull out of it. Of course, my generation and earlier one have earned the SSI and Medicare demise and what it would do to us. We created this mess. It should be on our shoulders to clean it up. (GULP!)

    {o.o}

    JDow (c4e4c5)

  117. 107. Don’t they teach anything in schools these days?
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_was_Sparta_the_only_city-state_without_walls

    Comment by nk (dbc370) — 2/18/2014 @ 8:18 pm

    Yes, they teach self-esteem, entitlement, and kinky gay sex.

    Speaking of Athens, the Athenians would happily sail into your Aegean island’s harbor and tear down your walls if they thought you were getting ideas about leaving their empire.

    And after the Thespians got slaughtered at the Battle of Delium in 424 B.C., the Thebans decided to tear down the walls at Thespiae. For two reasons. (A) they could since a lot of Thespian fighting men had been killed so those who were left were in no position to make a fuss. And (B) the Thebans thought the Thespians might be thinking of leaving their Boeotian confederation considering the Thebans kept putting them on the “inferior” left of the battle formation. Where they had to face the elite troops on the enemy right every single time. So more Thespian fighting men could be killed.

    So Sparta wasn’t the only city-state without walls. It even says so at your link:

    Why was Sparta the only city-state without walls?

    Answer:
    Many of the Greek city-states didn’t have walls, particularly in Asia Minor – it was a matter of whether they had anything worth looting, were capable of defending themselves anyway and whether they could rely on their Persian overlords to protect them.

    To that list of reasons why some city-states didn’t have walls we can add it’s because they couldn’t defend themselves without them. And the powerful city-state to whom they paid tribute wanted to keep it that way. Just so the city-states they dominated wouldn’t get ideas about not paying taxes or ponying up troops and ships upon demand.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  118. Walls are interesting and their purposes complex. Through history some have been built to keep people out and some have been built to keep people in.

    elissa (d711a1)

  119. Apparently, if Texas secedes, it might need to deal with some terrorists,
    but I’m sure the Iexas rangers (like Walker, not the baseball team) would do a better job than Holder’s DOJ.
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/02/18/fbi-docs-alleged-terrorist-training-compound-discovered-in-rural-texas/

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  120. The left flank of the phalanx required the braver men. The hoplite in the phalanx was partially protected by the shield of his companion to his right. So the phalanx would tend to drift to the right as each hoplite snuggled closer to the guy on his right to be better covered by his shield. The less scaredy-cat the left flank was, the less the drift. The left flank was at a disadvantage in having to wield their spears across their bodies and shields, against the direct thrusts of the enemy’s right flank.

    nk (dbc370)

  121. There is discussion of Scotland seceding from the United Kingdom. (Most Englishmen are in favor of it.) One question is what share of the UK’s national debt would be assumed by Scotland.

    I believe a similar question was raised when Czechoslovakia partitioned into the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

    Rich Rostrom (332cc6)

  122. With Czechoslovakia, there must have bene an answer too.

    As well as when Sweden was partitioned into Norway and Sweden in 1905.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  123. From best of the Web:

    Life in the Fast Lane
    New York’s new mayor, Bill de Blasio, has a proposal he thinks would make the streets safer, the New York Post reports:

    The city may rig yellow cabs with technology that would stop charging passengers whenever the driver breaks the speed limit, as part of a broad effort to make the streets safer.

    Taxis would also be equipped with black-box recorders that can track speed, braking and all movement by the vehicles.

    Mayor de Blasio said he is targeting yellow cabs because “they play a particular role in our city, set a tone on the streets.”

    Great idea! Well, except for one little problem.

    Passengers are often in a hurry to get somewhere, which means that they would share with the cabbies an interest in circumventing the proposed system. Which wouldn’t be at all hard to do.

    After all, tipping of taxi drivers is customary in New York, and drivers and customers could very easily negotiate “tips” that would compensate for the fares lost to speed-sensitive meters.

    Theer’s another problem, which best of teh web didn’t get to yet:

    The technology has not yet been invented!

    http://nypost.com/2014/02/20/technology-may-not-exist-for-taxi-speeding-proposal/

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  124. 94. Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/18/2014 @ 5:34 pm

    Sammy, those dates are silly. The 13th amendment was considered ratified in 1865 and the 14th amendment was declared ratified before the first southern state was readmitted.

    The requirement to ratify was solely so that there would be no confusion on the point later.

    There were those in Congress who held that the states had indeed seceded. That’s where these re-admission dates come from.

    The requirement to ratify was at least in some ways counting things both ways. But I guess you maybe had toi have it bnoth ways, because otherwise it would be an open question if the 3/4 included them, or not.

    Their real power to deny seating came from Article I, Section 5, Clause 1:

    Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members….

    And, frankly, the South got off pretty easy — there were folks in the North who wanted to hang all the slaveowners and rebel officers.

    That is true, and there was no legal bar to that.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5442 secs.