How Many Mississippi Voters Wish the South Had Won the Civil War?

[Barrister]

So the South has (or had) no possible right to seceed? 

The SCC said that while Quebec couldn't just do a UDI, neither could Canada just ignore the clearly expressed wished of Quebec - there would be an obligation on Canada to negotiate the terms of Quebec's exit from confederation.

You want to focus on the word "unilateral".  I don't think that's the best focus.

Do you feel that, either in the 19th century, or the 21st, that the US could ignore or deny the clearly expressed wish of some region to seceed from the United States?

[grumbler]

Why did you think that link would suffice, exactly?

Because I don't care overmuch and because it beats the link you've offered to contradict it.

I love the way we could hear the crickets after you noted this! 

[grumbler]

Do you feel that, either in the 19th century, or the 21st, that the US could ignore or deny the clearly expressed wish of some region to seceed from the United States?

Yes.  The US is a union.  Many groups have tried, at various times, to declare themselves to be independent of the US.   Under US law, these declarations have no weight whatsoever.

I understand that Canada is different.  A little research will  allow you to understand that, as well.

[Lettow77]

 Where is the justice or liberty in a union that, once you have acceded to it, it is binding for your progeny even unto the seventh generation?

Secession has only been widely recognized as "something with no weight whatsoever" in the aftermath of the South's failed secession, which was crushed by force of arms.

The union army was a mighty thing, but I am not sure it is the proper interpreter of constitutional law.

America has something glorious. Millions of people have come here because they wanted to do so. The idea of a section wishing to withdraw and being denied that right is antithetical to liberty, self-determination, and the ideas so many people associate with the American republic.

[Razgovory]

Why should a State have the power to leave the union but not say, a City?  Or a County?  Or just one guy's property?

The Southern cause was not helped at all by seizing federal property and shooting at federal soldiers.  If they just had a policy of non-compliance and forced the Federal government to fire first they might not gotten so many soldiers in the US to volunteer to stop them.

[Lettow77]

 Yeah, that might be true. the South was/is too rash and violent for its own good. It'd be interesting to see if a less violent path would have led to Southern independence, but I doubt it- the North wasn't as enthusiastic for the war as the South was, but they were plenty enthusiastic by yankee standards, in early 1861. There was desire on both sides to see blood spilled.

The State was conceived as a sovereign, largely autonomous political entity that voluntarily gives up some of its rights in the interest of the common welfare- if it does not feel it is being represented, it can withdraw.

For what its worth, Memphis's county has an ongoing secession issue. I tend to support the state constitution being amended to make secession more practical, but this creates a slew of administrative problems and such.

[grumbler]

Where is the justice or liberty in a union that, once you have acceded to it, it is binding for your progeny even unto the seventh generation?

Actually, it is binding beyond that.

Secession has only been widely recognized as "something with no weight whatsoever" in the aftermath of the South's failed secession, which was crushed by force of arms.

The union army was a mighty thing, but I am not sure it is the proper interpreter of constitutional law.

The Constitution was silent on the subject, so the matter was resolved via a higher tribunal.  When a group of men decide to take something that belongs to a sovereign, they can only do so by force.  In the case of the secessionists, they were much too feeble to do so. 

America has something glorious. Millions of people have come here because they wanted to do so. The idea of a section wishing to withdraw and being denied that right is antithetical to liberty, self-determination, and the ideas so many people associate with the American republic.

Pretty much anyone can depart the country at their leisure.  What they cannot do is force others to do so.  The US concept of law doesn't recognize the rights or powers of anything called a "section."  It is clearly absurd to argue that group of people, or "section" if you prefer, can unilaterally declare that the rights of every other American are null and void in some designated geographic area merely because this "section" of people declare it to be so.

[grumbler]

The State was conceived as a sovereign, largely autonomous political entity that voluntarily gives up some of its rights in the interest of the common welfare- if it does not feel it is being represented, it can withdraw.

States don't have rights and they cannot feel.

[Scipio]

I think it would be cool, so that I could carry on a guerilla war against the racist fuckwits who worship the Lost Cause.  Then die a glorious martyr to personal freedom, executed for peeing on a statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest.

[Razgovory]

It's funny, because the CSA's own constitution does not give individual States the power to secede.  So they did not believe they were defending or exercising a legal "Right" to secede.  They knew what they were doing was illegal, which is probably why they felt the need to seize federal arsenals and shoot at federal soldiers.  They also felt the need to murder citizens of their states that did not agree with the state's actions as evidenced by the wave of lynching that occurred through out the South at the beginning of the Civil War.

[Razgovory]

In a sense though it's good that the Civil War happened.  If it had not happened or it had been shorter then it was it would have been difficult to abolish slavery which would have been a moral and economic mill stone around the neck of the US.

[Capetan Mihali]

In a sense though it's good that the Civil War happened.  If it had not happened or it had been shorter then it was it would have been difficult to abolish slavery which would have been a moral and economic mill stone around the neck of the US.

Abysmal failure of Reconstruction = a moral economic millstone around the neck of the US, though.   

[Valmy]

Do you feel that, either in the 19th century, or the 21st, that the US could ignore or deny the clearly expressed wish of some region to seceed from the United States?

In all but the most severe circumstances absolutely.  But if they had a reason that was justified the whole country would probably be collapsing anyway.

[Barrister]

Do you feel that, either in the 19th century, or the 21st, that the US could ignore or deny the clearly expressed wish of some region to seceed from the United States?

In all but the most severe circumstances absolutely.  But if they had a reason that was justified the whole country would probably be collapsing anyway.

But who is to judge how severe the circumstances.  You?  The President?

Why not the democratic expression of the people involved?  You know - self-determination?

I am aware that because of the precedent of the Civil War the US does seem to think of itself as indivisible.  But dare I say it - that makes the USA a hypocrite.  Since at least as far back as Wilson's 14 points the USA has long championed the right of self-determination for other peoples of the world.  It has supported decolonialism on the grounds of self-determination.  It supported the independence of the nations of Austria-Hungary, the peoples of the Soviet Union, and most recently of the Kosovars.

And why are you so threatened by this?  Do you really think, say, Alaska is going to go out and vote on independence any time soon?

And there is the counter example of the Philipines - the only area of American sovereignty that was ultimately granted its independence that I can think of.  What makes the Philipines divisible, but not Texas?

[katmai]

And why are you so threatened by this?  Do you really think, say, Alaska is going to go out and vote on independence any time soon?