Hacker News Reader

Comment by dotcoma | Hacker News Reader

Is Texas getting ready to secede from the union, or what ?

While it wouldn't surprise me if Texas decided to secede, I doubt the creation of a cryptocurrency is a preparatory step for that.

This just feels like cryptobros convincing legislators to back their latest pet project.

Even in rural Texas it isn't a popular topic. But texas does not have the power to mint their own currency, only the fed does?

Judging from some of the other comments here, that's up for debate when it comes to cryptocurrency.

Yes. It is the stated position of the Texas GOP that they should secede. "33. State Sovereignty: Pursuant to Article 1, Section 1, of the Texas Constitution, the federal government199 has impaired our right of local self-government. Therefore, federally mandated legislation that infringes200 upon the 10th Amendment rights of Texas should be ignored, opposed, refused, and nullified. Texas201 retains the right to secede from the United States, and the Texas Legislature should be called upon to202 pass a referendum consistent thereto."

https://texasgop.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/6-Permanent-... https://www.thebulwark.com/texas-republicans-deadly-serious-...

There's a difference between maintaining the right to do something and wanting to do something or preparing to do something.

I maintain that I have the right to leave my employer and wife. I don't have plans or want to do either at the current moment

I suppose it depends on what "pass a referendum consistent thereto" means. I have no idea.

My suspicion is that it's talking out of both sides of their mouth. It means they can go to any kooks and say "We want to secede", while saying to everybody else "oh, it's just a referendum to re-assert what we already claim to be true, just for funsies".

> I suppose it depends on what "pass a referendum consistent thereto" means. I have no idea.

It means enacting legislation for a secession referendum, and holding the referendum. It doesn’t mean secession is going to win the referendum.

If Texas held a secession referendum tomorrow, I doubt “Yes” would get anywhere near a majority-and I’m sure they know that. It would be an exercise in moving the Overton window, not in actually seceding. Which I think is their whole point-actual secession would be enormously risky for unclear benefit, making it a topic of live political debate could have great reward for some.

That does seem consistent with my suggestion that it was talking out of both sides of their mouth. I'm quite certain they're not saying out loud that they expect it to fail. And that they are making promises in some quarters that they will endeavor to see it pass.

Secessionist threats can be a useful strategy to get what you want. Spain and the UK are examples of countries whose increased decentralisation (greater power for regional governments) is largely an attempt to subdue secessionist demands, if those secessionist demands had never existed that decentralisation may well never have happened-certainly not to the same degree. Similarly, the Canadian political establishment invested immense resources in constitutional reforms to try to satisfy Quebec nationalists (the Meech Lake Accord and Charlottetown Accord), although those reforms failed - without the threat of Quebec secession they likely never would have put so much time into it.

Whether that strategy works as well in the very different political context of the US remains to be seen, but it isn’t impossible that it might

Getting ready? Many in Texas never dropped the idea.

They even have their own separate power grid, just in case.

And how well is that going for them? It still sucks, and may crap out yet again during peak season this year

Any time there's a Democrat in the White House, Texas gets antsy.

Just like California when there's a Republican in the White House.

The question was resolved n 1865 with a lot of bullets and a lot of dead soldiers. Texas joined the Union in 1845, btw.

These are chucklehead GOP politicians who only have a seat through gerrymandering. I suspect if this was to go to referendum it wouldn't get far. The most citizens of their largest cities have no interest in secession.

No. They couldn't if they wanted to. There is no legal or constitutional basis for a state to secede. How would that even work? It's not like they can force people to leave the US and strip them of their citizenship. Are they just going to kick out over half the people in Texas? Besides Texas' economy would collapse immediately. There would be a mass exodus of businesses. Texas would be completely cut off from the national banking system. It's an absurd idea.

If it were to happen "legally", instead of "civil war II: the farce", I suppose the obvious bit would be to pass a constitutional amendment[1] to allow Texas to secede, probably after a Texit referendum. Presumably similarly to Brexit all the nitty gritty minor details like "not destroying the economy" can be worked out in negotiation between Texas and the USA, which will no doubt leave the newly independent Texas in a worse place and generally unhappy, but FREEEEEEEE.

[1] "Why would the other states ratify this?" you ask? Lets not quibble over minor details in silly make believe scenarios.

The article that allowed the UK to leave the EU was specifically crafted for the UK at the time they joined. The EU realized that mistake right away and removed it for future members.

No such agreement exists in the Constitution because having states come and go as they please would be incredibly dumb.

Huh? Article 50 is still there, and isn't a UK specific thing:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."

Wikipedia (at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...) notes that a formal method of leaving became a thing in the early 2000s when various Eastern European states were joining, not when the UK joined in the 1970s.

(As for the US, I did say actually passing a constitutional amendment to allow succession would be unlikely, but I don't think it's legally impossible?)

>As for the US, I did say actually passing a constitutional amendment to allow succession would be unlikely, but I don't think it's legally impossible?

Why would you need a constitutional amendment for more seasons of a popular TV show?

Even if the producers don't want to make any more episodes, all it would take is the money to acquire the rights to the show and pay for production costs. No Constitutional Amendment (or even a law) required.

Since 1845!

I mean the popular support isn't there but they'd in reality only need the support of the texas national guard. A traitor president also helps. And you also have a ton of people who go "who cares, let them leave" like they're breaking up with a romantic partner lol, absolutley no sense of patriotism.

I mean, I don't care if it is texas, missisipi or claifornia, I am an american and all of it is mine. Whether it is a buch of small skirmishes or a full on civil war again, sececession can only be accomplished by a lot of blood spilled. I can't stand guns and I don't even care enough about politics to vote but if any state tries to secede, I would join whatever military opposing them or just buy a gun and find a secessionist armed soldier to kill and hope that I have a death as honorable as fighting to defend your homeland, sure bests rotting in a bed or in a hospital. Even if I can't get others to join me I can contribute just my tiny drop of blood to the price that needs to be paid to separate a land from its people.

Now, there is exactly one scenario where I'd have no opposition to them seceding: if the constitution is changed to get rid of the electoral college, senatorial representation or if religious rights are infringed upon (even by a SCOTUS decision), and I don't mean protections for miniorities who disagree with a religion but anything that prevents people from sincerely believing (not satanists whose belief according to themselves is fake! For example) in a creator and acting on that belief (including voting). Because before you are a citizen you are a human and before you have legal rights you have natural rights that supersede legal rights(see: declararion of independence) which were the foundation and reasoning used to justify America's secession from Britain.

For Texas secessionists though, all they can acheive is destabilization of the US and as a result the whole world. Russia and China's wet dream but my take on it is that secession is as realistic as a neo-nazi white nationalist state.

> Whether it is a buch of small skirmishes or a full on civil war again, sececession can only be accomplished by a lot of blood spilled.

There have been peaceful secessions in the past - the split of Czechia and Slovakia back in 1993 was one example. And I believe that both Scotland and Catalonia can achieve a peaceful secession, assuming that their respective central governments decide to actually listen to the will of the people.

Of course it is possible, just not gonna happen in the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com