Monckton: It’s Time For ‘Texit’ — Texas Should Secede, Thatcher Advisor Says

[montanajoe]

I understand that, but I think you're wrong.  We have, what, the 9th largest economy in the world.  It's fine to be #nine.

This is one of those things neither of us will agree on. I know Texan's well enough to know I'm not going to change your mind so I guess we will have to wait and see

[geronl]

This is an idea that makes the conservatives look like a bunch of loony toon clowns to the rest of the population. Just like the loonies who took over that ranch in Oregon.

If the federal government abrogates the US Constitution, then the states are right to insist on independence

[Sanguine]

If the federal government abrogates the US Constitution, then the states are right to insist on independence

Exactly.

[montanajoe]

If the federal government abrogates the US Constitution, then the states are right to insist on independence

If the majority of Texas believes that, which I doubt, then adieus..

[Free Vulcan]

This is my country too and I'm planning on staying in it.

But let me ask you, how do you see the Texas secession working?  What are the steps?

I think it starts witha Convention of the States.

If that fails, here is the likely scenario:

We are in debt to the point where paying the interest out of our tax revenue is becoming a serious concern. It's estimated that within 10 years it will become the third largest spending category in the budget.

If we see the tax revenue plunge and debt increase at the same percentages in the next recession like we did the last, I do not see how we can fund that at the current interest rate. The world and particularly China doesn't have the ability to fund $2 or 3 trillion dollar deficits this time around.

Which means interest rates will rise. Since our average debt maturity is at about 6 years old, it will not take long for that to start rising quickly. When that happens, that's when the squeeze begins.

The govt will have to make choices. Cut benefits and frankly the cities burn when the welfare zombies go nuts. Then there's social security and healthcare. It is not a pretty picture. Washington will quickly become impotent as things spiral out of control.

Then at that point it's the governors that will have to make another decision. It's at that point I think you'll see the breakup.

[truth_seeker]

Fine.  He's still British, and they still boil their frickin' steaks.

 

Is boiled steak the meal of choice, for a long, hard day of "fighting" on forums ??

[truth_seeker]

I think we should try a Convention of States before we do anything else.

Who sets the agenda for such a political undertaking? Who manages it? What are the present goals ??

Has it ever been done successfully before ??

[austingirl]

Perhaps the naysayers could do some research before commenting?

http://www.thetnm.org/answers

[DiogenesLamp]

OK, I'll play your game for a little while.  The thing is, your quote doesn't say, "Right of some People", it says "Right of the People". The citizens of the other states count as People too, since we're all citizens of the United States, and therefore should have some say in whether one state leaves, or not.

Why should the citizens of other states have a say in what the people of my state want to do?  Your theory  justifies England's (those other "states"  of the United Kingdom")  position and delegitimizes our own.   


Your argument says that England was correct in suppressing our independence.   

Now, will you answer my question? Do you prefer bloodshed, or not?

No rational person wants bloodshed,   but you haven't answered my question.   Why should there be bloodshed if we simply follow our own founding principle?   

[DiogenesLamp]

If you check the numbers you will find that far more Federal dollars are going into the Texas economy than are collected in taxes. As I said the two biggest industries in Texas are oil and the Federal government..

Manufacturing in Texas is mostly for the oil or defense industries.

Again I'm not bashing Texas, but the I am bashing the idea that Texas would or could succeed, the idea is pure fantasy in my view...

Okay,  I checked the numbers,  and they do not prove what you claim.    Texas gets back 94 cents of every dollar it pays in Federal Taxes. 

   


It is a donor state.   

[Ghost Bear]

Why should the citizens of other states have a say in what the people of my state want to do?  Your theory  justifies England's (those other "states"  of the United Kingdom")  position and delegitimizes our own.   

They should have a say, because a state the size of Texas leaving the Union could have a negative economic impact on those states remaining in the Union. So they should get a say in the decision.

Your argument says that England was correct in suppressing our independence.   

Perhaps from the point of view of England, they were correct. The Colonies had a lot of economic potential after all, which the Crown lost because of the Revolution. I would also point out that many of the Founding Fathers struggled with the question of whether the Revolution was the proper course to follow.

No rational person wants bloodshed,   but you haven't answered my question.   Why should there be bloodshed if we simply follow our own founding principle?

I suggest that if Texas tried to leave the Union while the rest of the Union opposed such, then it would probably devolve into bloodshed. That often happens when two groups holding opposed views each try to have their own way.

[truth_seeker]

Let's examine your point.   The founders launched a rebellion against a nation that did not recognize a an inherent right to Independence.   To justify their independence,  the founders declared that the "laws of nature,  and of nature's God"  entitled them to leave.   

They won the war,  and presumably validated that principle as well.   


One would think that this meant the nation would thereafter recognize as valid this principle articulated in it's founding document;   Indeed,  the very justification for it's own existence.   


But four score and seven years later,  the principles which legitimized our own founding were no longer valid?

 
How does that work?   

Simple. The so called "principles" in the Revolution were validated by the military victory, not the fancy words.

[austingirl]

Secession does not mean war. The Texas Nationalist Movement has been working in the State government to build support for a resolution. Texas is an economic powerhouse and has ports, oil, and our own Texas Guard. We have one of the largest economies in the world and would have a generous policy for welfare dependents to leave the Republic of Texas.

[Oceander]

Why should the citizens of other states have a say in what the people of my state want to do?  Your theory  justifies England's (those other "states"  of the United Kingdom")  position and delegitimizes our own.   


Your argument says that England was correct in suppressing our independence.   




No rational person wants bloodshed,   but you haven't answered my question.   Why should there be bloodshed if we simply follow our own founding principle?   

The rest of the union has a right to a say in what Texas does because that is in the nature of a union.  When Texas joined it agreed to give up certain attributes of sovereignty, and that necessarily implies that it agreed to give the other states in the union some say over Texas' own internal affairs.  That includes if/when/how, if at all, Texas might be able to leave the union. 

[austingirl]

The rest of the union has a right to a say in what Texas does because that is in the nature of a union.  When Texas joined it agreed to give up certain attributes of sovereignty, and that necessarily implies that it agreed to give the other states in the union some say over Texas' own internal affairs.  That includes if/when/how, if at all, Texas might be able to leave the union.

From the TNM website:

First of all, there is no manual for independence. There is no set process. Even though the world has grown from 54 recognized countries at the end of World War 2 to 192 at the end of the 20th century, each took its own unique path. However, there are some guidestones that must be met. The most important is that there must be a fair vote on the issue of independence by the people of Texas. No matter what happens before or after, there must be a legitimately recognized vote of the people. In Texas, the road to that vote leads through the Legislature in Austin. There it can be obtained by a simple bill calling for the vote or an amendment to the Texas Constitution. Either way, the support of ½ or ⅔ of the Legislature and possibly the Governor will be required. That support is obtained by pressuring existing elected officials or replacing them. Pressuring or replacing them is done by the people. Which brings us full-circle. The people that pressure or replace will be the same ones voting for independence. No matter where you are in the process, the people are the ultimate deciding factor in getting it done.


According to the Economist magazine and the Tax Policy Foundation, over the past 20 years, hard-working Texans have put more money into the Federal system than we have received.



Texas will defend itself just like every other nation on the globe - with a well-armed, well-trained, highly prepared military. Texas already has the Texas Military Forces, a three-branch military of which the Governor is the Commander-in-Chief.

[DiogenesLamp]

They should have a say, because a state the size of Texas leaving the Union could have a negative economic impact on those states remaining in the Union. So they should get a say in the decision.

And you don't think the 13 colonies leaving England had an economic impact on England?   



You know what?  Let's first establish your position on the Colonies leaving England.   Do you believe they had a right to leave or not?   

Perhaps from the point of view of England, they were correct. The Colonies had a lot of economic potential after all, which the Crown lost because of the Revolution. I would also point out that many of the Founding Fathers struggled with the question of whether the Revolution was the proper course to follow.

They resolved that issue in favor of Independence.   They then asserted that they had a right to be independent.   

I suggest that if Texas tried to leave the Union while the rest of the Union opposed such, then it would probably devolve into bloodshed. That often happens when two groups holding opposed views each try to have their own way.

In a nation founded on the principle that Independence is a right,   there should be no group willing to argue that it isn't a right.   


In other words,   those who believe they have a right to force subjugation on others,   are incompatible with this nation's founding principle.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Simple. The so called "principles" in the Revolution were validated by the military victory, not the fancy words.

No,  that's not how "Principles"  work.   That's how FORCE works.   To assert that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT,  is a justification for Tyranny.   

[Ghost Bear]

You know what?  Let's first establish your position on the Colonies leaving England.   Do you believe they had a right to leave or not?   

Yes, I do. So what are we arguing about? 

[Oceander]

From the TNM website:

First of all, there is no manual for independence. There is no set process. Even though the world has grown from 54 recognized countries at the end of World War 2 to 192 at the end of the 20th century, each took its own unique path. However, there are some guidestones that must be met. The most important is that there must be a fair vote on the issue of independence by the people of Texas. No matter what happens before or after, there must be a legitimately recognized vote of the people. In Texas, the road to that vote leads through the Legislature in Austin. There it can be obtained by a simple bill calling for the vote or an amendment to the Texas Constitution. Either way, the support of ½ or ⅔ of the Legislature and possibly the Governor will be required. That support is obtained by pressuring existing elected officials or replacing them. Pressuring or replacing them is done by the people. Which brings us full-circle. The people that pressure or replace will be the same ones voting for independence. No matter where you are in the process, the people are the ultimate deciding factor in getting it done.


According to the Economist magazine and the Tax Policy Foundation, over the past 20 years, hard-working Texans have put more money into the Federal system than we have received.



Texas will defend itself just like every other nation on the globe - with a well-armed, well-trained, highly prepared military. Texas already has the Texas Military Forces, a three-branch military of which the Governor is the Commander-in-Chief.

That's fine, but it doesn't get rid of the fact that Texas gave up some attributes of sovereignty and subjected itself to certain obligations to, and limitations imposed by, the other states when it joined the union.  It is that which gives the other states in the Union the right to have some say in whether Texas can legitimately leave the Union. 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Would Texas get nukes? Or would they be another Canada? 

[austingirl]

That's fine, but it doesn't get rid of the fact that Texas gave up some attributes of sovereignty and subjected itself to certain obligations to, and limitations imposed by, the other states when it joined the union.  It is that which gives the other states in the Union the right to have some say in whether Texas can legitimately leave the Union.

Which attributes of sovereignty did Texas give up? Can you provide details? When the Secession Resolution passes in the Texas Legislature it would be presented to the extra-Constitutional federal government for consideration.

[DiogenesLamp]

The rest of the union has a right to a say in what Texas does because that is in the nature of a union. 

Such as the "Union of the Crowns",   otherwise known as the United Kingdom?   Is that how UNIONS work?   


(Union Jack,    Flag of the UNITED Kingdom.)   




How then do we justify the founders leaving such a Union?     

When Texas joined it agreed to give up certain attributes of sovereignty, and that necessarily implies that it agreed to give the other states in the union some say over Texas' own internal affairs.  That includes if/when/how, if at all, Texas might be able to leave the union.

And the United Kingdom did not claim some say over the internal affairs of the 13 Colonies?   


You are going to have to explain your theory in such a way that it does not contradict our own history.   Every standard you name would have precluded our own Independence from England.   


Either the Founders were right in breaking away from England,   or they were wrong.   It would be helpful if all of you people arguing against the right to independence would clarify your position on whether the Founders and the States they represented,   had a right to leave the British Union or not.   


At least then we could see if your beliefs were consistent,   or if you are trying to have it both ways.   

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Such as the "Union of the Crowns",   otherwise known as the United Kingdom?   Is that how UNIONS work?   


(Union Jack,    Flag of the UNITED Kingdom.)   




How then do we justify the founders leaving such a Union?     






And the United Kingdom did not claim some say over the internal affairs of the 13 Colonies?   


You are going to have to explain your theory in such a way that it does not contradict our own history.   Every standard you name would have precluded our own Independence from England.   


Either the Founders were right in breaking away from England,   or they were wrong.   It would be helpful if all of you people arguing against the right to independence would clarify your position on whether the Founders and the States they represented,   had a right to leave the British Union or not.   


At least then we could see if your beliefs were consistent,   or if you are trying to have it both ways.   

The dispute was settled on the battlefield. Might makes right.

[DiogenesLamp]

Yes, I do. So what are we arguing about? 

Then I ask that if you are specifying any requirements before a state may be allowed to leave,   I suggest you ask yourself if these same requirements applied to the colonies leaving the United Kingdom.   


If they do not,   then I suggest you don't try to apply a different standard to any independence bid by one or more of the states,  then what you would apply to the colonies.   

[DiogenesLamp]

The dispute was settled on the battlefield. Might makes right.

So you believe that if I have the power to murder another human being,   then it is my right to do so? 


That bloodshed is the final arbiter of morality?    That we have no fixed moral compass?   


If that is your opinion,   then you are far away from me in your philosophic outlook,   and I hope you never manage to get your hands on the levers of power.   

The world has history enough of Tyrants who recognize no greater power than themselves.