Breaking Point

[Nitrogen]

Texas never had any such bit in their treaty to sccede.  They CAN split into 5 different states, though, which I think would be a far better option.  10 more republican senators, and at LEAST 5 more congressmen?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Besides, one major secessionist and his family dies in a "tragic house fire" and the rest get a visit from the feds saying knock it off or you're next, and it's bye-bye secessionist movement.

How would you know?

If we ever get to the point where FedGov is threatening the physical safety of our families, then it's entirely possible that an awful lot of people would be willing to use violence to defend themselves.  You could easily find a lot of people willing to fight back. 

Killing a secessionist's family could easily have the exact opposite results of what you describe.  It would almost certainly convince more and more people of the need to secede.

[Gewehr98]

If they secede, they have to take Austin with them.  Them's the rules.   

[CNYCacher]

How would you know?

Besides, one major secessionist and his family dies in a "tragic house fire" and the rest get a visit from the feds saying knock it off or you're next, and it's bye-bye secessionist movement.

How would you know?

[crt360]

How would you know?

Probably by the sound of gunfire when the fighting started.

Besides, one major secessionist and his family dies in a "tragic house fire" and the rest get a visit from the feds saying knock it off or you're next, and it's bye-bye secessionist movement.

You're joking, right?  By "the rest", do you mean the 18% who would vote to secede?  I'll let someone else do the math, but that's a lot of visits by feds to people who might already dislike feds (and certainly will after the "tragic house fire"  ), and it's not unreasonable to assume that roughly 100% of Texans who are on the secession bandwagon are armed.

[Balog]

 

If you think fed.gov monitoring of subversive types stopped with hippy protestors in the 60's your naive. If you think the fed.gov is unwilling to kill innocents you weren't paying attention to Waco and Ruby Ridge.

I'm saying that any type of secessionist movement would need strong charismatic leaders. They might have thousands of followers, but it'd be a handful of people spearheading the effort. If one died in an accident, would you say "The feds did it!" or would you accuse anyone who said that of wearing tinfoil? How many of these leaders would risk either 1. defying a credible threat of certain death for them and their families or 2. saying in public that the fed.gov is threatening them, whereupon they'd be laughed out of the room as Alex Jones-style conspiracy theorists.

We gave the fed.gov the power to declare American citizens "enemy combatants" and hold them for as long as they want. You can argue about how the Bush Administration didn't violate the rules or abuse that law. Whatever, that's a moot point. The same crime political family that used the FBI to spy on their enemies and sold national secrets to the ChiComs for campaign funds is deeply involved in the White House. You really think they wouldn't go there?

Edit: are the people who routinely mock conspiracy theorists really saying that one political opponent of the fed.gov dying (apparently accidentally) would incite them to start an armed revolution? Sure......

[MicroBalrog]

f one died in an accident, would you say "The feds did it!" or would you accuse anyone who said that of wearing tinfoil?

If you couldn't credibly say FedGov did it, how could people be threatened by it? After all, everybody would think it's just an accident.

That's a major hole in your argument. You're saying that the Federal Government could simultaneously threaten counltess people with murder and keep it completely secret from these same people that they're being murdered.

[crt360]

If you think fed.gov monitoring of subversive types stopped with hippy protestors in the 60's your naive. If you think the fed.gov is unwilling to kill innocents you weren't paying attention to Waco and Ruby Ridge.
 

I don't think anyone believes the federal government gave up monitoring subversive types.  I, along with the rest of Texas (and I'm guessing plenty of other people in the US), watched the Branch Davidian activities as they happened.  It did a lot to shape locals' perception of the feds.

I'm saying that any type of secessionist movement would need strong charismatic leaders. They might have thousands of followers, but it'd be a handful of people spearheading the effort. If one died in an accident, would you say "The feds did it!" or would you accuse anyone who said that of wearing tinfoil?

Charismatic leaders are always helpful.  If it didn't look like the feds did it, it wouldn't influence anyone in either direction.  I would not accuse anyone who thought it was not an accident of wearing tinfoil.

How many of these leaders would risk either 1. defying a credible threat of certain death for them and their families or 2. saying in public that the fed.gov is threatening them, whereupon they'd be laughed out of the room as Alex Jones-style conspiracy theorists.

1.  I have no idea.

2.  Who would be laughing them out of what room?

We gave the fed.gov the power to declare American citizens "enemy combatants" and hold them for as long as they want. You can argue about how the Bush Administration didn't violate the rules or abuse that law. Whatever, that's a moot point. The same crime political family that used the FBI to spy on their enemies and sold national secrets to the ChiComs for campaign funds is deeply involved in the White House. You really think they wouldn't go there?

Why wouldn't they go there?


 

[Jimmy Dean]

I don't think that you know many Texans very well.  I lived in Texas for 11 years, grew up there.  We took just as much Texas History and American and World history.  If suddenly one day two or three leading representatives in a seccession movement did not show up to work, and the other high profiles stfu about it, at least publically, then pretty sure that the rest of the state would figure out just wtf was going on and act on it.

[Balog]

Micro: I'm assuming the people who did it would be able to prove it. And as I said, cut off the head and the body dies. Eliminate the potential leaders and the movement goes down.

Let's say tomorrow a big time "Let's secede" policritter and his family die. Prolly looks accidental. A year or two from now any serious rabble-rousers get a late night visit from fed.gov, they show him proof they did the hit, and tell him stfu or your next.

You think that's impossible? You think if the policritter who was threatened went public with the story many people would believe him?

If no one went all revolutionary over Waco, and very few people were willing to even look at the death of all the witnesses against the Clintons I find all these "Any threat against a governor would mean WAR!" posts amusing but showcasing a naivety about recent history.

[MicroBalrog]

So. You're implying that the United States government would operate, in America, a classified assassination program against local legislators. That nobody would leak this program. And that the United States government would be capable of carrying out what is essentially a conspiracy worthy of Alex Jones, and nobody would find out? And that the United States government can go into the houses of dozens of state legislators and threaten them in the middle of the night, and it would remain secret? That it would risk doing so despite the obvious risks of failure?

I have a question.

Why don't people like Farrakhan get midnight visits?

Why didn't John Walker Lindh have a terrible, and tragic, accident?

Why didn't the leaderships of the Alaskan Independence Party (or any number of similar groups) have terrible accidents happen to them?

Finally, consider this:

If it turns out that the Federal Government is running a covert assassination program against political opponents in local governments, then it would effecitvely mean that the American Republic had died. No ifs and buts about it. If you have people executing people in the middle of the night for their political views, what you have is not a Republic. It's not even a Democracy.

If that happens - and I do not believe it would ever happen, for the reasons I outline above - then it would be morally permissible to rise up against such a government. Becuase that would have gone far beyond the normal restrictions that all Western democracies impose on their citizens (restrictions which are already, IMO, repressive and unjust) and straight into 1930's-type political tyranny.

Such a thing happening, if it became public, would vindicate the most horrendous tinfoil hat accusations of any secession movement - which is precisely why it  wouldn't happen. Not because the people in Washington are nice people, but because the most minute failure would bring the whole works down.

[Perd Hapley]

So. You're implying that the United States government would operate, in America, a classified assassination program against local legislators. That nobody would leak this program. And that the United States government would be capable of carrying out what is essentially a conspiracy worthy of Alex Jones, and nobody would find out? And that the United States government can go into the houses of dozens of state legislators and threaten them in the middle of the night, and it would remain secret? That it would risk doing so despite the obvious risks of failure?

Yeah, I agree that kind of thing would get out.

Balog, the people who were threatened don't need to hold a press conference.  It's much easier to just slip clues anonymously to certain people, telling them the whole story and then dropping hints about where to look for confirmation.  Even if the establishment press didn't take the bait, you could still find people willing and able to get to the bottom of something like that.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

The FBI or other members of the federal alphabet soup could swoop in and snatch a few politicos. If they did, they'd probably need gunships for a second session. You'd be seeing FBI/ATF/DEA/whatever offices torched, probably folks shooting whoever came out the door (because in the absence of leaders, you can get some really bloodthirsty folks running the show). Texas would likely be a very, very dangerous place for federales.

You think if the policritter who was threatened went public with the story many people would believe him?

Do you know how many people think Elvis is still alive? That the mob/Castro/whoever killed Kennedy? That 9/11 was an inside job? What makes you think that a public figure with some actual credibility would be ignored? They're blaming a very popular scapegoat.

[Perd Hapley]

They're blaming a very popular scapegoat.

Hey, thanks.  I kind of suspected you guys secretly liked me. 

[Jamisjockey]

Most people talk big, but when confronted with a small army of feds carrying automatic weapons and using APC's, they would capitiualate easily.  Maybe a few former military types that would, but most wouldn't.

[erictank]

How would you know?

First guy visited (or second, or third, or nineteenth...) gets on the Intarwebz (perhaps through a buddy?), the story gets out, more people start relating similar stories, etc. 

The word *WOULD* get out. 

[Cliffh]

First, let me say that I don't put much faith in polls.  There are too many ways for them to be manipulated.

In general, why would the fed.gov care enough to start a shooting war if a state did in fact want to secede?  What harm would it cause the other 49 states?  Except that maybe one or more others may want to leave also.  And in that case, why should that be such a big deal, since they'd be getting rid of at least most of the malcontents and would then be able to set up the rest of the U.S. as they see fit.

A couple things not mentioned about Texas; we have our own power grid and oil distribution system - with the oil to go with it.  Basically, there should be enough in the way of infrastructure to support us as a stand-alone country.

If secession was being seriously considered and if there seemed to be inappropriate fed.gov interference with any of the process, I'd bet there would be enough volunteers show up to provide 24/7 protection for the affected individuals.

[Jamisjockey]

First, let me say that I don't put much faith in polls.  There are too many ways for them to be manipulated.

In general, why would the fed.gov care enough to start a shooting war if a state did in fact want to secede?  What harm would it cause the other 49 states?  Except that maybe one or more others may want to leave also.  And in that case, why should that be such a big deal, since they'd be getting rid of at least most of the malcontents and would then be able to set up the rest of the U.S. as they see fit.

A couple things not mentioned about Texas; we have our own power grid and oil distribution system - with the oil to go with it.  Basically, there should be enough in the way of infrastructure to support us as a stand-alone country.

If secession was being seriously considered and if there seemed to be inappropriate fed.gov interference with any of the process, I'd bet there would be enough volunteers show up to provide 24/7 protection for the affected individuals.

We've gone to Iraq, twice, to help secure our oil source.....why not Texas?

[MicroBalrog]

We've gone to Iraq, twice, to help secure our oil source.....why not Texas?

How would Texas seceding endanger your oil source?

[Cliffh]

We've gone to Iraq, twice, to help secure our oil source.....why not Texas?

How would Texas seceding endanger your oil source?

Exactly.  Ya'll could still go to Iraq, or buy ours. 

[Balog]

I'm not saying it would happen, or it would necessarily happen in that manner. But if a serious independence movement ever came close to be a real issue, the feds would stop it before it became a real danger. Or try to do so.

Wouldn't take many people, and lots of people is what make most comspiracies unworkable. 5-10 real loyal ATF agents could do a lot of damage, and get away with it. You think the same fed.gov that thought no one would ever call them on letting blacks with syphilis die untreated, and thought they'd get away with all the other things they've done (and who have gotten away with it largely) would be so terrified of blowback they'd not do that?

I love the "It would be the end of the world!!!!" objections. If we didn't revolt when the feebs torched a building full of women and little kids then machine gunned them as they ran out, you really think a couple guys saying the feds threatened them means Civil War part 2? That's funny. Naïve, but funny.

As for why they care about states leaving.... Are you serious? The people who so lust to control every aspect of your life (seatbelt and helmet laws, .gov healthcare, .gov retirement) that they make the expansion of power their chief political goal are just gonna concede hundreds of millions in taxes and tens of millions of voters? Right......

[Strings]

Someone check the temp in Hell: I have to agree with Balog.

The next civil war is NOT going to be "Us v Them". If and when it happens, it'll be "Us v Them v Those Dudes Over There v Many Other Groups".

Think the standoff scene at the end of Reservoir Dogs, only on a mass scale.

[MicroBalrog]

Or try to do so.

Try being the operative term.

The scenario as you put it out is impossible to accomplish.

If we didn't revolt when the feebs torched a building full of women and little kids then machine gunned them as they ran out, you really think a couple guys saying the feds threatened them means Civil War part 2?

There is a difference between a failed police operation against a group of highly unpopular people (remember, it's not like Clinton actually deliberately ordered the FBI to kill the Branch Davidians. If he had done that, they'd all be dead) and actually going out and executing/threatening political dissidents.

[Jamisjockey]

How would Texas seceding endanger your oil source?

They would probably identify the loss of GDP, and the loss of the oil, oil refineries and ports as a threat to national security.  I'm no economist and don't know how it would affect the rest of the states. 

[Balog]

Micro: what part is impossible?

5-10 alphabet soup agents going off and whacking a politico? Foster and Brown.

You think they wouldn't try to intimidate others? Clintons using the FBI and IRS to track and harrass their enemy.

You don't think the threatened politicos would back down? Maybe maybe not; it's easy to be a hero and say "I'd never back down" when no one is pointing a gun at your head. That's assuming they couldn't be bribed, or blackmailed, or smeared and discredited etc etc.
The feds would crush any serious secessionist movement.