372
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
372 points (97.9% liked)
News
23376 readers
3390 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A non-amicably seceded Texas is doomed as a country. No food, drugs, or medical supplies from the rest of the country. No parts to repair their oil wells or vehicles (made by businesses in other states). Companies like John Deere would be forced to brick all equipment in Texas. Then the US government imposes sanctions on any country doing business with Texas, and businesses outside Texas are restricted from doing business in Texas. Nobody comes to their rescue when the power grid fails in an ice storm or a hurricane blows through the state.
Face it. States are too interdependent to cut ties with the rest of the country.
Brexit showed us that situation like this the 'bigger person' in the conflict will try not to starve millions of people to death and will not simply cut them off. We as individualise would surely like to see Brits/Texans suffer all the consequences but politicians are usually more pragmatic than this and have to think long term. Turning Texas into 3rd world country wouldn't do any good to anyone. Blocking supplies as some sort of collective punishment would simply be immoral.
Of course they are not going to secede but if they did they would still get all the supplies they need. Their economy would suffer greatly but they would just blame US and keep going.
I mean, we've also seen a lot of cases of the exact opposite. It's entirely a question of which position is held to be long term better not just to the parties in question, but to the actual politicians as well.
The UK is more valuable to the EU as a less favorable trading partner than as a pariah, and there was no plausible way for the EU to convince it's members that there was any course to take other than letting them leave exactly as fast as the treaties said they could.
They made it about as painful as they could while fulfilling their treaty obligations.
There is no defined legal mechanism for a state to leave the union. There's no long term incentive for politicians to create one. There's no individual incentive for one either, at the national level.
Punishing secessionists to maintain precedent would be the only viable move for any politician.
Of course you don't let them starve, but you also don't let ships into your territorial waters near areas with violent insurgents, and you warn your neighbors that trade will suffer if they're found to be supplying said insurgents.
It's literally the position of the US government that secession is not possible, not just "not permitted".
States didn't seceed during the civil war, they were never their own country, and any treaties or legal actions taken by their supposed governments have no weight.
Don't look at it through the lens of "how would the US treat the new nation of Texas", but "how would the US treat the armed rebels in the state of Texas".
Where? Where was there a recent independence movement that succeeded and was punished by the original country?
Wouldn't blocking supplies starve them?
Again, this is silly debate as Texas will not secede but if they do it's crazy to think that US government would just abandon millions of democratic voters living there. There are pretty much two options: either US government would use force to regain the rule there or would pretend that everything is OK and keep cooperating (like Spain and Catalonia, give them more and more independence without formally recognizing it). They definitely would not impose blockade and risk creating North Korea style regime right at their border.
Clarifying that it has to succeed is a bit weird. The civil war is the part of the host nation retaliating against the breakaway faction. It's kinda like asking when has a country ever retaliated after they stop retaliating.
In any case, the war in Kosovo and the Sri Lankan civil war come to mind. Oh, and Ireland. That one's nice and complicated.
You blockade supplies from other countries, because it's unacceptable for someone to supply armed insurgents.
Trade and supplies can still be moved around by the Government to ensure they don't get taken by insurgents.
That's just how you do counter insurgency. Keep them from getting food, fuel and ammunition. Give those things to people who agree with you, and make sure they have everything they need.
I agree that Texas isn't even going to try, but if they do the US isn't going to just say "okay, now you can use our shipping lanes to trade with China while we sort this out".
Ok, we're simply talking about two different things. You're saying that if US would fight Texas they would cut off their supplies. Yes, your right, kind of obvious.
What I'm talking about is that they would not target civilians even in case of a civil war and in case Texas did somehow became independent (they will not) they would not try to starve all Texans to death as a form of punishment. We were talking about consequence of Texas becoming independent, not about what would happen during the war. Yes, the independence movements are often bloody but even Ireland has good relations with UK now. UK didn't block their accession to EU or anything like that just to punish them.
I would absolutely expect Texas to throw a fit that they would be treated like a foreign country that now has to do trade deals and visas and shit rather than just a cool super state that can do whatever they want.
If you or anyone would like to see Brits or Texans 'suffer their consequences' for a minority of misinformed people deciding the future of their state, you need to get some empathy and perspective. Texans haven't voted for this, and 17 million people decided Brexit for a country of nearly 70 million.
I just meant is a normal human reaction (I even said it would be immoral. Did you see that?). I understand that people like to see this as some sort or 'justice'. You keep telling Brits that it's a bad decision and it would hurt them and then voilà, they suffer the consequences. It just feels good to be right but of course if you think about it a little you realize it's a overall terrible thing and feel bad for all the misled people.
Nothing would make me happier than to see those braindead republicans catch the car, so to speak. They have absolutely no foresight whatsoever, they just think they can pray for a viable government into existence. Texas is such a joke and they think all the other states are just jealous they aren't Texas, lol embarrassing.
Texan here. The vast majority of us don’t want to secede and think this is crazy. Please don’t curse us along with the monsters that are ruining our lives.
And before the “just move” train starts, a lot of us would like to, but we need access to our current support systems to survive, and can’t detangle our lives from our area at the drop of a hat.
Maybe they don't want to secede exactly, but I'm not so sure they think this is crazy. Although the demographics in Texas have shifted some in recent years, Abbott was still elected with more than a 10% margin, and polls seem to indicate that a majority of Texans support him on this issue. I don't doubt that most of the people you know agree with you but Texas is a big state with a very large rural population, and most of them very much believe Texas has the right to defend its own border with Mexico.
Do you live here too?
And yeah, we think we have a right to defend the border, but that isn’t the same as saying that our way of doing it supersedes the national government, or that it is something to secede from the union over.
And who are they polling? Because the last several elections have proven that polls are often wrong in this country, and especially this state.
Everyone allowed to vote is who they "polled"... We're talking about the 2022 Texas gubernatorial election...
You can't say that the majority of people in Texas don't like the leadership but there's nothing you can do about it when Abbott got nearly 20% more votes...
I understand what you're saying, and it's nothing personal against you. But, can I ask what are you doing to help? If being cursed with the consequences of personal comfort and complacency is what it takes to create actual change for the people that Texas so be it. I'm sure the majority don't like it, it's embarrassing, but what are they doing? Are they calling/emailing/writing to leadership? Are they voting? Are they encouraging their family members to vote? Until the majority get active against this insanity it's going to get worse.
As it so happens, yes. My family has been politically active as Texas progressives for almost 100 years now, and I’m part of that chain. I’ve been at the protests, made the phone calls, signed the petitions, and donated the money I can spare. Furthermore, I have a lot of friends who have been doing the same.
We aren’t all complacent down here. Our state has been heavily gerrymandered to the point that we need a lot more than a simple majority to win an election. We’re doing everything we can, but anyone looking at the Republican Party right now can see that it is a huge and dangerous organization. They use smoke and mirrors to make their control in this state seem a lot more absolute than it actually is.
Edit: I also wanted to add that when you call your Texas representatives, they don’t answer the phone. Shame doesn’t sway these people, which is why our best hope is changing demographics and getting out the vote.
All I have to say is keep up the good fight. I know not all of Texas is like my family who are trump humping bastards. Keep fighting, I hope you guys can make some progress and de-program some of your peers but I know it's an uphill battle. I don't even live there and I'm exhausted with it all. I truly truly appreciate what you guys are doing. I don't even live in Texas and I'm exhausted with their politics. Good luck, rooting for you from the East Coast 💖
One day, when this state is truly purple and we stop with the regressive politics, I hope people come visit us here and see what some of the good things are about Texas. Big Tex at the State Fair is really a sight to behold, and our brisket and Tex Mex will bring tears of joy to your eyes. Plus, “y’all” was way ahead of its time as an inclusive and non-gendered term—we don’t get enough credit for that.
That’s the Texas I’m from, that’s the Texas I’m proud of, and that’s the Texas that awaits America on the other side if y’all can help us throw off our republican shackles.
4head why didn't I think of that? Just vote! It's so fucking obvious! I'm gonna vote even HARDER this time! That'll fix it!
yeah. that will fix it.
What if mexico just decides to retake what used to be theirs and send the army to conquer seceded Texas? 🤔🤔🤔 Serious question
No one in Texas would allow that to happen. So, war
I think if Texas does secede it will still have trade partners. I have a feeling it would ironically be Mexico and even China could mix in Russia in there too. Basically anyone who hates USA.
Radical isolationists having trade partners? LoL who? Mexico has far more reasons to hate TX alone than the remaining 49. They could basically write off Europe and the Middle East.
Ok yeah. Russia would be all over them. If they could bypass the US blockade.
Cuba!
I don't want to compare Texas to NK but since you mentioned a radical isolationist I instantly thought of NK. Based from this article https://www.forbes.com/sites/katharinabuchholz/2023/05/26/who-is-north-korea-trading-with-infographic/?sh=532c63bf1496 it still has trading partners.
Edit: gave the wrong link
Nation states don't hate each other. They have no feelings, only interests. If it's in Mexico's interest to trade with Texas, they will.
Radical isolationist Texans have no idea what makes a nation state besides hating other countries.
Why would Mexico trade with a seceded Texas? Would they want to end all commerce with the U.S.?
It seems logical to me they are neighbors. It may be not at first, but if Texas does survives after whatever war happens. Eventually a neighbouring nation would see Texas as a potential trading partner. We can see the same thing with Pakistan and India they still trade despite they hate each other.
Russia and Ukraine are neighbors. North Korea and South Korea are neighbors. I have no idea why you think neighbors means trading partners.
I'm sure both examples given were at some point have trade relationship or was open to trade relations, I think NK and SK had the Sunshine policy. It may not be now. A close one was normalization of Israel and Arab countries could eventually lead to trading between Israel and Arab nations which Hamas ofcourse took that away. If we look for another one is Indonesia and Malaysia the creation of it was bloody but look at it now. Both nations are trading. Taiwan and China still both trade despite being technically at war with each other. Japan who did horrible things during WW2 now trades with it's used to be enemies.
I see, so you mean eventually Mexico would trade with Texas. Sure. Maybe. But not any time soon after they seceded. The U.S. is Mexico's #1 trading partner. Why would they jeopardize that to help a single breakaway U.S. state?
It's like how Canada and America are so interdependent and ... Wait a sec.