Debate Now I'm Leaving! Who Is With Me?

[Statistikhengst]

Might I suggest you choose a better tract of land first. You need access to the sea so that your "country" can't be strangled before it even gets a chance to begin.

Yes, indeed, starting landlocked is not exactly the brightest of tactical moves. Somewhere with a nice coastline is prolly good.

I recommend Vancouver.

Not Florida though cuz quite a lot of the shore line will soon be under water.

Vancouver. Canada won't notice that it's missing.

Toro - what do you think?

 

[Foxfyre]

Of course. Who would not be interested in creating a state that would reflect what they believe to be the best form of governance?
The only reason to not represent would be that you disagree with the original charter.

So do you agree with the rough outline of a new charter as proposed in the OP? If not, what would you change? That is the purpose of the process of course, to agree on what will go into that new charter.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Might I suggest you choose a better tract of land first. You need access to the sea so that your "country" can't be strangled before it even gets a chance to begin.

I agree. It's a long walk to the beach from central Kansas, and the lobster bisque there has got to suck.

I'd go if there was a chance our new 2nd amendment excluded rapid fire weapons.

Well can I put you down to represent your state then Nosmo? I don't see why anything would necessarily have to be off the table for discussion, though I think those who are leaning toward the new Declaration of Independence probably would not agree to federal control of rapid fire weapons, but would not interfere with a state that chose to regulate that.

Waidaminnut, are you talking about a New Declaration of Independence for the Breadbasket States of America (NDIBSA), or the New Constitution of the Breadbasket States of America (NCBSA)?

 

[Foxfyre]

I am all for having fun with the topic guys, but one of the expressed rules in the OP is to stay on topic.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Are you talking about military firepower alone? Or are you including other kinds of passive resistance, like, oh, say, refusing to pay taxes. That sort of thing.

Which of course brings us to the question of whether or not a sovereign country would be allowed to use infrastructure without paying their fair share of the maintenance and repair.

And how about mineral rights and the use of water that belongs to the US?

Just wondering how this would be handled.

 

[Foxfyre]

No. The u.s. seems fine as is from where i sit.

Taxes are not historically high.
We are fighting wars, but not the kind that require drafts and the women to work the mills.
We are technologically advanced, and nasa is doing great things that id sincerely hate to miss out on their benefits.
I make great money. Im free to do 99.9% of the shit i ever feel like doing.

Ive no complaints at the moment when purposely zoning out the partisam bickering and doom and gloom.

Things are quite literally superkewl

Then you likely wouldn't be interested in participating in a discussion of whether or how to secede. And that's kewl too.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I do think that if you are planning to secede, it is good to send an Emissary to the former Republic to which you once belonged. Someone with gravitas, someone with Kansas deep in his bones.... someone with... well... I think you can find a name.

Also, in order to spare a nasty and costly war, perhaps a trade between the fledgling Breadbasket States of America (BSA) and the former Republic known as the USA, something like giving us all your brightest and most brilliant and we give you Idaho.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Clean up" the Constitution is libertarian for returning to discrimination, segregation, and the age robber barons.

 

[Foxfyre]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Are you talking about military firepower alone? Or are you including other kinds of passive resistance, like, oh, say, refusing to pay taxes. That sort of thing.

Which of course brings us to the question of whether or not a sovereign country would be allowed to use infrastructure without paying their fair share of the maintenance and repair.

And how about mineral rights and the use of water that belongs to the US?

Just wondering how this would be handled.

When the original revolutionaries seceded from England, they didn't worry about what belonged to England. I suspect a lot of modern revolutionaries would figure they had paid for whatever the new nation would claim as its own.

 

[Foxfyre]

"Clean up" the Constitution is libertarian for returning to discrimination, segregation, and the age robber barons.

I will refer you to rule #1 of the thread rules please. Make your argument for any problems you would see in people having more liberty, but no ad hominem or personal attacks re any person or group.

 

[Dot Com]

From the, uhm, OP:

"We will take the best of the existing U.S. Constitution as the model for a new nation. This Constitution will be 'cleaned up' so that the original intent of the various articles and Bill of Rights will not be easily misinterpreted. (All other existing amendments would have to be debated and re-adopted.) And a new Constitution will reflect a society that has moved beyond the patriarchal and racial assumptions of our historical past and secure the rights of all on an equal basis."



Which parts need to get kirby'd up??



I guess the indentured servitude part could go, or would you like to keep it?

And shouldn't the 2nd amendment become the 1st article of Liberty in the New Constitition of the Breadbasket States of America (BSA)?

I agree. Are we to believe that OP is a constitutional scholar?

ALSO, seceding is a tacit admission of failure that one cannot appeal to the masses and garner their votes.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The very first issues that would likely come up in discussion would be:

1. How would the new government be funded?

and,

2. Are we going to allow the states free rein in deciding such issues as welfare, marriage, abortion, regulation of drugs, guns, healthcare, and other controversial matters?

1.) Hard work.

2.) Would federalism rule as with the former Republic known as the USA? If so, then each of the new provinces could decide for themselves whether they hate gay people or not, or how many AK-47s they can brandish on the street and whether or not they should have the death penalty for women to try to abort, and of course, they could just decide to completely outlaw welfare and make it illegal to be poor.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Are you talking about military firepower alone? Or are you including other kinds of passive resistance, like, oh, say, refusing to pay taxes. That sort of thing.

Which of course brings us to the question of whether or not a sovereign country would be allowed to use infrastructure without paying their fair share of the maintenance and repair.

And how about mineral rights and the use of water that belongs to the US?

Just wondering how this would be handled.

When the original revolutionaries seceded from England, they didn't worry about what belonged to England. I suspect a lot of modern revolutionaries would figure they had paid for whatever the new nation would claim as its own.

Well actually, they did.

Indeed, it was such a huge concern to them, they moved several thousand miles away.

Which means your scenario is not at all related to the first settlers of what eventually became the US. What you have described is a bunch of tiny "countries", all of which currently depend on the Big Country.

One can say they are against Socialism but its a basic truth that there is strength in numbers.

I'll be back to see how you plan to defend and support all these tiny slivers of land.

 

[FA_Q2]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Yes, Satyagraha could be a good option.

It really is the only option in the current military world in setting up a new nation IMHO.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am all for having fun with the topic guys, but one of the expressed rules in the OP is to stay on topic.

I am staying on topic, contributing information and asking questions.

What is your beef, Master Sergeant Fox??

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Are you talking about military firepower alone? Or are you including other kinds of passive resistance, like, oh, say, refusing to pay taxes. That sort of thing.

Which of course brings us to the question of whether or not a sovereign country would be allowed to use infrastructure without paying their fair share of the maintenance and repair.

And how about mineral rights and the use of water that belongs to the US?

Just wondering how this would be handled.

History shows us that the struggle for Independence more often than not means war, with all it's blood, gore and spoils.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Yes, Satyagraha could be a good option.

It really is the only option in the current military world in setting up a new nation IMHO.

Gently protest and let the former USAers get tired.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I am sorry. In your poll, I don't see "pineapple". Maybe there was a software failure??



Now, as to the actual, uhm, declaration of Independence, have you decided if your blessed stretch of territory has enough firepower to defend itself, should the USA not necessarily like seeing Cowtown, Kansas secede?

I move for a Gandhi like resistance – simply refuse to participate until we are allowed our own governance.
Are you ready and willing to obliterate those who are willing to live in peace?

Are you talking about military firepower alone? Or are you including other kinds of passive resistance, like, oh, say, refusing to pay taxes. That sort of thing.

Which of course brings us to the question of whether or not a sovereign country would be allowed to use infrastructure without paying their fair share of the maintenance and repair.

And how about mineral rights and the use of water that belongs to the US?

Just wondering how this would be handled.

When the original revolutionaries seceded from England, they didn't worry about what belonged to England. I suspect a lot of modern revolutionaries would figure they had paid for whatever the new nation would claim as its own.

True. This is usually acheived by war and the spoils of victory.

But the fledgling USA enlisted the help of the Germans and the French in order to separate itself from the Crown of England. Mebbe Mexico could help the Breadbasket States of America.

 

[FA_Q2]

Of course. Who would not be interested in creating a state that would reflect what they believe to be the best form of governance?
The only reason to not represent would be that you disagree with the original charter.

So do you agree with the rough outline of a new charter as proposed in the OP? If not, what would you change? That is the purpose of the process of course, to agree on what will go into that new charter.

In general, yes. I would prefer something added to preserve the 14th amendments inclusion of protections to the states level as well for protected rights.
Many of the people here really like to ignore the fact that the founders actually did not create a government that recognized inalienable rights as they were fine with the states violating your rights all day long. I think that protections at all levels of government needs to be hard coded into the government from the start for enumerated rights – we STILL have yet to complete that in this nation.

 

[Statistikhengst]

From the, uhm, OP:

"We will take the best of the existing U.S. Constitution as the model for a new nation. This Constitution will be 'cleaned up' so that the original intent of the various articles and Bill of Rights will not be easily misinterpreted. (All other existing amendments would have to be debated and re-adopted.) And a new Constitution will reflect a society that has moved beyond the patriarchal and racial assumptions of our historical past and secure the rights of all on an equal basis."



Which parts need to get kirby'd up??



I guess the indentured servitude part could go, or would you like to keep it?

And shouldn't the 2nd amendment become the 1st article of Liberty in the New Constitition of the Breadbasket States of America (BSA)?

I agree. Are we to believe that OP is a constitutional scholar?

ALSO, seceding is a tacit admission of failure that one cannot appeal to the masses and garner their votes.

I'm not so sure about that. Sometimes, secession has had a positive effect. The separation of India into India and Pakistan was maybe, in retrospect, not such a bad move.