• bizarroland@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    9 months ago

    Part of me would rather have Washington, Oregon, and California become the new Republic of Cascadia.

    The other part of me would be happy to become a Canadian.

    Either way works for me. Somebody just roll out the bill and I’ll sign.

      • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Its almost like the reason to secede would be completely different in 2025 than in the 1860s. Are you suggesting that the 2025 secession would end badly? And for which side is it going to end badly for?

          • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            9 months ago

            There’s no law left.

            The constitution has been terminated, as per Frumps statements and actions.

            Besides, can’t commit a crime if you’re defending your country. Straight from the horses ass. He didn’t say which country.

          • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I mean, to secede would eliminate a lot of laws that you previously had to follow, but once seceded, don’t apply to you anymore (at least in the eyes of the state).

      • bizarroland@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        In the original Civil War, the Confederacy had the land advantage and a surplus of people willing to fight.

        The North had just as many people willing to fight, but also money.

        And because they had money, they had better weaponry, better cavalry, and healthier, happier soldiers.

        Further, there were many people in the South who did not agree with the Civil War and who supported the North’s conquest of the South.

        The South was in a very bad situation financially and organizationally to fight a civil war, whereas Cascadia, being Washington, California, and Oregon would have quite a bit in its favor, Especially if we did something outlandish like ask the Chinese for help in exchange for a trade agreement.

        Having a new country pop up between America and the far west would be disastrous for America’s financial stability.

        I am not saying that we should start a civil war or that we should actually secede from the union. I am just saying that this would not resemble the civil war at all, and barring an early blitzkrieg or a nuclear assault, they could win.

      • bizarroland@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        I mean, yes, or we could annex the tip of Idaho and exile everybody that voted for Trump Or that does not swear allegiance to the new Republic of Cascadia.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Let 'em make Jefferson. I worked in the parts of the Sierra where the idea was popular (even though this county wasn’t even included in the proposal lmao), and it would make the poorest state in the union. It’d be even poorer than W. Virginia and Mississippi. Let’s see if maybe they like San Francisco and Sacramento a bit more once they realize who was paying for CalFire.

    • kata1yst@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      9 months ago

      The sad but mostly hilarious part is that the remaining red states would make an obscenely poor country with nearly zero economic prospects. The blue states have been subsidizing their existence for decades.

  • Hello_there@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    If they weren’t cowards they would sign an asylum bill to let USians immigrate without delays

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Wait, so now that Americans need somewhere to go, unlimited and unregulated immigration is the answer?

      Hopefully you’ve not made any jokes about immigrants. Like… ever.

      I mean that’s completely possible, I just hope you haven’t.

      • Hello_there@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        I make jokes about immigrants. Like making fun of how they are less likely to commit crimes than us-born

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Oh shit, you actually got me there. As I forgot you can joke about anything, as long as it is a good joke and not actually advocating for a bad thing. It’s just that most “jokes” you hear about immigrants aren’t actually jokes but poorly disguised shitty ideology, so I was thinking of a slightly different context perhaps.

  • pezhore@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    Just make DC, Puerto Rico, and hell, Guam a state and you can still keep the flag the same. Or split up Texas into three gerrymandered states to guarantee a forever republican government.

    • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      California is probably the only state that could do absolutely just fine as a country. It has a top-tier economy on it’s own, the necessary population, the internal food surplus, and the access to ocean ports, needed to run independently

      • nelly_man@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        The biggest issue is water, and it would be difficult for them if they lose access to the Colorado River. Currently, only 10% of the river’s flow reaches Mexico, so it’s not unreasonable to believe that California would be in trouble if they don’t secure control of the upper basin. In any case, it would make for a complicated legal battle between an independent California, the United States, and Mexico.

  • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    Michigan, the Dakotas, and the original 13 are also welcome.

    Wisconsin can suck it. Fuck the Packers

  • rbos@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m not in favour of this, as a Canadian. The power imbalance is too great. It would make Canada a Californian state, rather than California a Canadian province. They would never accept rule from Ottawa.