SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the you-can-go-your-own-way-♩♫♩♫ dept.
Supporters of a plan for California to secede from the union took their first formal step Monday morning, submitting a proposed ballot measure to the state attorney general's office in the hopes of a statewide vote as soon as 2018.
Marcus Ruiz Evans, the vice president and co-founder of Yes California, said his group had been planning to wait for a later election, but the presidential election of Donald Trump sped up the timeline.
"We're doing it now because of all of the overwhelming attention," Evans said.
The Yes California group has been around for more than two years, Evans said. It is based around California taxpayers paying more money to the federal government than the state receives in spending, that Californians are culturally different from the rest of the country, and that national media and organizations routinely criticize Californians for being out of step with the rest of the U.S.
Could California go it alone?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:31PM
For years I have been regularly instructed by The Narrative that secession movements are always and forever dog whistles for neo-confederate racists. States Rights is also a code word for racists wanting to bring out the chains. What are we supposed to think about this? Somehow I doubt we will get an honest admission that it is only OK when Progressives do it.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:52PM
For years I have been regularly instructed by The Narrative that secession movements are always and forever dog whistles for neo-confederate racists. States Rights is also a code word for racists wanting to bring out the chains. What are we supposed to think about this? Somehow I doubt we will get an honest admission that it is only OK when Progressives do it.
Succession is "OK" if you believe in a weak federal government and strong states' rights, and not "OK" if you believe in a strong union and states' rights being reigned in by a federal constitution. It's not really a right vs left question, except that since the civil war racists have often hidden behind this argument when their real objective isn't states' rights, but succession from the federal government and a free hand to run amok against minorities, and in particular target the black and Jewish communities (and also the Catholics, which is amusing given the central role Catholicism has played in just about every western fascist regime from before Hitler to the present, but I digress).
I don't think this will go anywhere (I tend to believe in a strong union over states' rights, though if the white supremacists now in power run amok I could see my opinion changing, as a matter of self-preservation if nothing else), but it is amusing to see the racist Republicans who are now in power in a position to be forced to "eat their own dogfood."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by meustrus on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:53PM
Fixed that for you. Because while it may fall along the same lines much of the time, we all know what the divide really is.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:55PM
Well, it is possible that after the last election liberals have finally seen the wisdom of a limited federal government, and if not that, secession is the only other option.
Why are you laughing?
(Score: 4, Touché) by ikanreed on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:03PM
They overwhelmingly were exactly that and this one is misguided, for pretty much the same reason the racists are always wrong: not liking an election result isn't a reason to secede, regardless(Except maybe Scotland and brexit where EU membership was used as a primary justification for staying the first time, so the inversion is a reason to secede).
The underlying motives are different with neo-confederates. I mean I get that you're jmorris and understanding even the most obvious and face-hammering of nuances isn't your thing, but come on. Not everything is about how oppressed you are for your shitty, shitty political views.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by butthurt on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:19PM
[...] not liking an election result isn't a reason to secede [...]
Perhaps it isn't only the result of the 2016 presidential election that bothers them, but a system designed to "nerf" the influence of people in the most populous states. The intention was to balance the power of the slave-holding and free states.
California has 12.0% of the U.S. population but 10.2% of the Electoral College votes and 2.0% of the Senate seats. Texas has 8.4% of the the U.S. population, 6.3% of the Electoral College votes and 2.0% of the Senate seats. Both California and Texas were, briefly, independent. The Texas secession movement has the euphony of "Texit" in its favour.
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/inspired-brexit-texas-considers-seceding-texit-article-1.2686747 [nydailynews.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population [wikipedia.org]
http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/electorl.htm [worldatlas.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @02:40AM
Los Angeles County has WAY more people than Wyoming, yet that sparsely-populated state gets 2 senators, while the entire state of California gets the same count.
If there was to be a proper "Democracy" in the USA, a system of senatorial districts would be a good start.
Some folks have redrawn the map of the USA, divided into 50 equal divisions by population.[1] [archive.li]
L.A. County, Orange County, and the Frisco Bay Area come out as examples of those divisions.
The rest of the state (well, sorta) gets split into 3 more divisions.
N.B. Those 3 counties would be Blue (Orange County switched colors in the 2016 election) and the 3 other chunks would be Red.
We really do need a Constitutional Convention to rework a whole bunch of outdated ideas that are still in the centuries-old founding document.
[1] There's another dude(?) who used pretty much the same divisions but came up with some different names.
He called Washington+Alaska "Washlaska" and called Hawaii "Nice Weather".
Bitterroot is "Rocky Mountain High" and Great Basin is "Loving Hands".
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 24 2016, @03:38AM
So CA should split into multiple states then.
Without the Senate and without the EC, the people of NY City, Chicago, LA, and San Francisco would have total say over an entire country with many varied local cultures for which they have absolutely no understanding or caring. I say this as a Green voting lefty, not some right wing whatever.
Honestly, Democrats are a bunch of whiners crying about losing and blaming the structure of our government rather than the fact that they ran a war mongering, offshoring, prison state loving, surveillance pushing, bankster codling candidate while totally ignoring the plight of the working class. Yet it's the structure of our gov't at fault? Give me a break. Here's the run down:
B Clinton won first election (helped by Perot). 2nd win is a gimme, evidence: GWB. SInce then however:
Gore: ran as more hawkish than GWB (though GWB lied) and as a wall street shill. LOST
Kerry: more of the same neo-liberal crap. LOST
Obama: Ran as a raging liberal (also lied). WON
H Clinton: Ran as center/right Republican. LOST
It doesn't take much more than a 25 IQ to understand the Clinton-way, is the losing way. Democrats wanna win elections? Move left. Otherwise, run yourself into irrelevance -- you're almost there now.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday November 24 2016, @06:25AM
A minor point: the San Francisco area isn't as populous as you imply; for census purposes it's the 11th most populous metropolitan area. The Dallas area is the fourth most populous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas [wikipedia.org]
[...] total say over an entire country with many varied local cultures for which they have absolutely no understanding or caring.
You exaggerate, but I agree that a pitfall of democracy is the tendency to act against the interests of minority groups. However, weighting people's influence according to where they live makes it more likely that the interests of the majority won't be served. Jeremy Bentham would not approve.
> I say this as a Green voting lefty [...]
According to Breitbart News,
Trump won Pennsylvania, with its 20 electoral college votes, by 68,236 votes, Wisconsin, with its 10 electoral college votes, by 27,257 votes, and Michigan, with its 16 electoral college votes, by 13,107 votes.
Had those 108,600 votes gone to Hillary Clinton, she would have won the presidency with a a 278 to 260 electoral college victory over Trump.
-- http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/11/113000-votes-pa-wi-mi-gave-trump-56-electoral-college-votes/ [breitbart.com]
Jill Stein is trying to raise funds for a count of the votes in those three states.
http://jillstein.org/recount [jillstein.org]
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 24 2016, @08:02AM
I'm really mad at Stein over this. If Clinton wins, progressive values are dead for anywhere from 8 to 20 years. With Trump, a lefty stands a chance in a mere four years and Democrats won't sit around silent while their president guts the Bill of Rights and gets us into a nuclear conflagration over pipelines in Syria. Clinton would have to see all three state go her way though, which is pretty unlikely.
(Score: 3, Informative) by FatPhil on Thursday November 24 2016, @09:22AM
Don't repeat Breitbart maths, they ain't too bright. Had 54301 of those votes gone to HC, she would have won, as she'd have 54301 more, and Trump would have 54301 fewer.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by BK on Thursday November 24 2016, @06:01AM
OK. Agreed. But replace them with what and how... ? Yes, that's the purpose of the convention, but it's not nearly that simple.
From CNN [cnn.com]:
A convention may not give you the changes you want. You may not get the rules you want. When time comes to compromise...
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday November 24 2016, @08:26AM
There's another dude(?) who used pretty much the same divisions but came up with some different names.
He called Washington+Alaska "Washlaska" and called Hawaii "Nice Weather".
Bitterroot is "Rocky Mountain High" and Great Basin is "Loving Hands".
I always thought the natural divisions of the US were the People's Republic of California, the United States of Canada, and Jesusland.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 24 2016, @12:47PM
Some folks have redrawn the map of the USA, divided into 50 equal divisions by population.
That would be another nail in the coffin for the division of power from federalism. Currently, a senator represents a state not some arbitrary division of people. And of course, I guess we haven't yet learned of the perils of gerrymandering? The power of the Senate gets transferred to who is in control of allotting these senate divisions.
I'll note that these these matters are routine rural/urban conflicts and as a result, a strong reason for the Senate and Electoral College still exists: to give rural areas a voice. In other words, some of the same reason these things existed in the first place still persist.
We really do need a Constitutional Convention to rework a whole bunch of outdated ideas that are still in the centuries-old founding document.
There are two problems with this assertion. First, the convention would have to be called for by at least two thirds of the states (currently 34 states). That means that you would have to include a fair portion of the states whose interests are being acted against by this convention. Second, so what if there's a few outdated ideas in the document? What makes you think everyone is going to agree on which ideas are the outdated ones? For example, some might think that the Second Amendment is outdated while others might think direct vote of US senators is outdated (and instead require senators to be appointed by governors of the states which incidentally neatly eliminates your concern about the Senate while making the Senate more like the EU's Council of the European Union).
My view is that instead of making a mess that nobody will like (and which only a tyranny could pass), use focused amendments that consist of the desired change as well as the necessary political bribes to induce parties to vote or secondary changes (so you aren't stuck in some terrible intermediate state).
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Thursday November 24 2016, @12:34AM
It's not because of the election results, but what the new administration of white nationlist racist fuckwads PLAN on doing.
That's why. They are not going to undo all of the progress and make us fight for another 40 fucking years just get equal rights to everyone, overtime pay for those that deserve it, all kinds of environmental regulations.
What the limited government people forget, is that the vast majority of it falls under the simple fact that unless we tell corporations to act like human beings, and EXACTLY how to act in the best interests of the public (We the People), they never fucking do it. Regulations didn't occur in a vacuum, but originated first by the refusal of some corporations to do the right things.
That's because Capitalism tells them (their version) that absolutely anything that greed dictates (profits going up) is instantly okay, and that nobody should have the rights to impugn on their freedom to do it, regardless of the human costs.
I greatly suspect that the vast majority of people running around today don't realize that the regulations that Trump and small government people hate include the 8-hour day and overtime pay. All the coal miners being told to vote Trump is fucking rich when he and his vile cronies will give the coal baron back all of the power. We won't go back to the inhumane conditions of before will we? No chance? LOL. Get ready.
THAT was something women and children died for in front of their protesting husbands that were massacred. There is a huge history of suffering about to be completely and utterly undone while hateful pieces of human excrement walk around (and online) spewing their hate filled rhetoric against immigrants, liberals, progressives, and anybody that has a brain and can understand climate science.
The country has simply become too divided. This isn't an argument, dude, but a break up.
Grounds for divorce couldn't be more clear to all parties involved.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 24 2016, @03:41AM
This freakout about Trump is nuts. Look at all the neocon shit Obama did over the last year. The Democrats literally epoxied their mouths shut and sat on their hands. Not one thought to ask "What would Cheney do with this power?" Had HRC won, the slide into police state would have continued unabated with not whisper of protest.
Trump is a gift to progressive values. People will protest, push back, get unruly and as a result there will be compromise. The REACTION to Trump is the best thing to happen to progressives (whether they know it or not) since FDR.
(Score: 2) by BK on Thursday November 24 2016, @04:03AM
I heard the same BS out of conservative talk back when Obama was elected. The sky was falling. The world was gonna end. OMG! Eric Holder is his AG nominee! They have plans!
The (so called) MSM is/ has become to the left what talk-radio and infowars is to the right. The problem is not that these outlets exist... free speech is good... but rather when you can't filter it. I don't think Trump knows what he plans do do really. I'm not sure that he can last a year in office without doing something that will lead "his own" party to impeach him. But the MSM is telling us about his 'plans'. Somehow they 'know'. Maybe like they knew how the election was gonna turn out.
The BHO administration, frustrated by a congress who could not produce legislation, started pushing the limits of what the executive branch could do without the legislative. The problem with this approach is that the undo process is the same for a future administration. So yes, they're probably gonna roll back the easy stuff. And because congress doesn't need to get involved, there will be lots of easy stuff.
When you do a thing unintentionally, it's an accident. When you do a bad accident to lots of people, it's a tragedy. But when you know what you are doing and it kills people, it's murder. And when you support a murderer... [washingtonpost.com]
If BHO had dealt with this [washingtonpost.com] decisively, HRC would have won. If he had found a better answer to this problem, HRC would have won. If he had dealt with these guys [google.com], HRC would have won. Any one of those. Before you blame Trump for what he has not yet done, you should look at your own heroes...
This didn't happen back in 2009 because people remember what happened last time there was a 'breakup'. Even when BHO twisted the knife [politico.com]... I thought HRC supporters were supposed to be more educated?
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 24 2016, @01:12PM
It's not because of the election results, but what the new administration of white nationlist racist fuckwads PLAN on doing.
You equate that with capitalists, greed, and so on. It's yet another reminder of how bankrupt those phrases are these days. I think what's most telling here is that they aren't any more racist than you are. Should we similarly discount your beliefs and interests?
What the limited government people forget, is that the vast majority of it falls under the simple fact that unless we tell corporations to act like human beings, and EXACTLY how to act in the best interests of the public (We the People), they never fucking do it. Regulations didn't occur in a vacuum, but originated first by the refusal of some corporations to do the right things.
Follow the money. At least half the US budget is social programs not regulation. So right there, the "vast majority" doesn't fall under regulation.
I greatly suspect that the vast majority of people running around today don't realize that the regulations that Trump and small government people hate include the 8-hour day and overtime pay. All the coal miners being told to vote Trump is fucking rich when he and his vile cronies will give the coal baron back all of the power. We won't go back to the inhumane conditions of before will we? No chance? LOL. Get ready.
Let us recall that the most powerful tool of the large business and cartel is barrier to entry [wikipedia.org]. Complex and onerous regulation is a key part of the current US approach to creating such barriers to entry. I think the thing I despise most about politics are the people who create the problem they claim they want to fix.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Thursday November 24 2016, @05:42AM
It was said by a senator from South Carolina in 1861 that South Carolina was too small to be a country and too large to be an insane asylum. California is large enough to be a country in its own right, and one of the most prosperous on Earth, and succession is definitely not an insane idea when the federalism fails it. However, I think succession is a bad idea because, like it or not, the United States is much stronger together than it is separate nations. The Donald being the president is more a statement by the electorate that the country needs to go in a different direction than a statement that he would make a good president. It's a virtual certainty he will be perhaps the worst we've had... and we've had several incredibly incompetent ones (no, I'm not naming names but if you know your history you know who they are).
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:28PM
You poor soul. You really do have trouble, don't you?
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:26PM
You raise good points.
I think this is cool, and I certainly think anyone in California who wants to secede should be permitted to, and looking at the new President, I can't blame them. (Of course, I feel the same way looking at the last several Presidents, too.)
Of course, I think anyone in California who doesn't want to secede should be permitted to secede from California and remain in the USA if they choose. That is what freedom is all about.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 4, Funny) by mhajicek on Wednesday November 23 2016, @10:12PM
Let them go, let them destroy all their guns, then we can just re-conquer them to be a non-voting protectorate.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 4, Informative) by aristarchus on Wednesday November 23 2016, @10:37PM
Never read Ecotopia by Ernest Callenbach, published in 1975?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @05:30PM
we'd have to throw a few million in floating reeducation camps and give them a push out to sea.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Wednesday November 23 2016, @11:56PM
You're kidding right? The South wanted to leave the Union because of a business dispute. As much as it was about slavery, that was only being pushed because slaves were competing with the workers in the North, and it is hard to compete with a slave. It was a bunch of rich fuckers that brought the country to war simply over their avarice, and they threw each other under the bus with claims of treason while plotting treason. Not that I blame them entirely, they could see through abolitionists claims to the greedy businessmen in Washington tired of playing a losing economic game.
It has nothing to do with Progressives, and everything to do with the abject failure of the U.S government and white nationalists taking the White House and threatening to do undo every single ounce of progress in civil rights, human rights, overtime pay, the environment, etc. while allowing Trump the biggest pay-to-play presidency the world has ever seen with the most conflicts of interest any president has ever had. What the fuck did you think would happen? Everyone goes back into the closets? Liberals just shut down? Older family members just move in with younger ones when Social Security and Medicare are eradicated? We're going to still pay taxes to this new administration and watch our loved ones die in the street? Social Security fucking works, and until you have a super concrete fucking plan for dealing the loss of income and medical care for these people, all you have done is consign them to the gutter.
This time around it does come from the people, and the arguments are numerous and vast. Over half of the voters repudiated Trump and the abhorrent ideology of the alt-right hate movement. Like I said, we're not going to just take it. In addition to succession we're getting the electronic voting machines audited, because Hillary may have actually fucking won. Regardless, We're not backing down, fuck Trump, fuck his white nationalist racist cabinet members, his AG, etc.
At no time will Trump be our President, and succession is the proper and moral move. We're simply too different from the hate and fear that no rules too much of the country. This is just the beginning, and I would like to see a compact form between groups in Portland and Seattle to pull the entire Western seaboard off the U.S political map.
From succession, to Declaration of Independence II, Article 5 Conventions, mass civil disobedience, protests, and god knows what else are going to be brought to bear upon the hate movement that captured our government.
At whatever cost, we will be free again.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @02:32AM
Put down your latte, stop posting on Soylent and do something you pussy. I dare you. Your type are born to be ruled over. You lack the courage to act on your borrowed convictions.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by BK on Thursday November 24 2016, @05:22AM
We can use the word 'repudiated' if you want. It's not a proper synonym for 'didn't vote for'. But if you want to use it that way, HRC was also 'repudiated'. Due to the magic of minor parties and FPP voting, neither got a majority of the popular vote but still a winner was declared.
The rules are complex and maybe even stupid. But there is a certian justice in it since in truth nobody got a majority of the popular vote. The party of the anti-globalist 'white nationalists' defeated (on a technicality) the party of the globalist 'black and mexican nationalists'. I'm just glad that none of these racists got a national majority.
Your candidate was (also?) REPUDIATED.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @09:41PM
That's the major takeaway from this election.
The Working Class is done with Neoliberalism.
Now, Joe Average's choice of an alternative to Clintonism seems odd to a lot of us.
...and the numbers this time are interesting. [heavy.com]
Eligible to vote - 231,556,622
Didn’t Vote - 96,421,324 (41.6 percent)
So, "None of the above" outdrew everybody on the ballot.
The tallies of those who did vote [wikipedia.org] show that Jill got over 1 percent and Gary got over 3 percent (still not enough for federal matching funds next time around).
If you scroll down a bit to Results by state, the 3rd party results are interesting.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday November 24 2016, @03:28AM
As a Cascadian Separatist, and a lefty, I'm stoked that it is finally sinking into people's minds that secession is not just for racists.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday November 24 2016, @06:16AM
For years I have been regularly instructed
We have found the error. You do not just walk into Mord. . . instruct jmorris! It will not take! He will not understand! He will think you failed his sorry ass because you are a libtard professor! Because he cannot understand the simplest things about humanity, helocentric systems, global warming, equality before the law, and universal human rights. Go look HERE [un.org], jmorris. Instruct yourself. You signed this. Do not depend on teachers like Newt Gingrinch, who is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person is. There is a whole new world of rational thought and reality based reasoning out there, jmorris! If only you make the slightest move to meet it, it will meet you more than half way.
But, not in that way. Pervert.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday November 24 2016, @08:24AM
Can you even hit Ft.Sumter from California?