"Soft secession" might be the best real-world compromise (in terms of minimizing body count or other disorder). This is a term I see crop up at times in the dissident media. As I grok it, it basically means that individual States disregard Federal dictates. It's not all or nothing. A current example is TX's law that proposes to allow the…
"Soft secession" might be the best real-world compromise (in terms of minimizing body count or other disorder). This is a term I see crop up at times in the dissident media. As I grok it, it basically means that individual States disregard Federal dictates. It's not all or nothing. A current example is TX's law that proposes to allow the State to deport illegals. This has already happened to a certain extent, such as the aforementioned marilization of legalwana. That, in effect was several States telling Washington f--k you, you say pot is illegal. We say not. And, so far as I know, the Feds blinked. Of course, the background issue is to what extent States have the right to be autonomous. How far will the trend continue? Who knows?
"Soft secession" might be the best real-world compromise (in terms of minimizing body count or other disorder). This is a term I see crop up at times in the dissident media. As I grok it, it basically means that individual States disregard Federal dictates. It's not all or nothing. A current example is TX's law that proposes to allow the State to deport illegals. This has already happened to a certain extent, such as the aforementioned marilization of legalwana. That, in effect was several States telling Washington f--k you, you say pot is illegal. We say not. And, so far as I know, the Feds blinked. Of course, the background issue is to what extent States have the right to be autonomous. How far will the trend continue? Who knows?