• Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    232
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wouldn’t encouraging cession mean MTG is now encouraging active rebellion against the United States? And wouldn’t that make her ineligible to hold office under the 14th amendment?

    Let’s get that lawsuit roll’in.

  • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Union should have scorched earth the South when it had the chance. Tear up their train tracks, block the harbors, nationalize all the farm lands, dissolve the rebel states borders into Federal Territories, hang all rebel political leaders and put all military officers above Lt. in front of the firing squad. Instead, you let them live and fester, even naming military bases, ships and tanks after them.

    • CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If we had done to the south after the civil war what the world did to Germany after world war 2, I firmly believe we would be in a much better place.

      • Riyria@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know why you got downvoted because it’s fact that a lot of wealthy southern families are generational plantation wealth that just pivoted into the corporate world after slavery was abolished.

          • Riyria@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, Americans aren’t even taught in primary and secondary school that the American Revolution was started by the 1% who wanted more representation for their interests in parliament, not the interests of the poor. The founding fathers were largely wealthy plantation owners, traders, and other types of elites who were losing even more money than before because of the unfavourable tariffs levied on the colonies after the seven years war. Thousands died so the rich could stay rich.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s do a quick thought experiment and say there was an actual legal framework for states to leave the union. How do Republicans think that would go? Under no circumstances would any major city in the south go along with leaving. Republicans states are far more purple than elections would suggest due to voter suppression, election fraud, and gerrymandering. So in reality the confederate areas would just be poor rural areas. Add in the fact that the US holds the keys to all the military equipment and weapons, the confederate areas would turn into a lawless hell scape over night. And without nuclear weapons and no international agreements for defense, I’m sure Mexico and Cuba would love to reclaim some of their lost territory.

    I can go on. But the main reason these idiots keep bringing this up is to suggest violence into getting their way. It’s not even a viable option to even consider for them. The situation I made is a best case scenario for them to. If they tried to violently leave the union it would be couple million good old boys in trucks up against jets and tanks.

    • solstice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like logistically it would make Brexit look like the Velvet Revolution breakup of Czechoslovakia. Clusterfuck doesn’t even begin to describe it. We are sort of stuck with each other like a crabby old married couple that hates each other but they just don’t really have any options so they stick together barely speaking except saying fuck you to each other when they pass in the hallway.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Would love to see the Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator between a couple million good old boys in trucks vs like 50 jets and 50 tanks.

      • GreenMario@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        All them good ol boys riding Walmart mobility scooters due to spending all their points into Diabeetus.

        I just wanna see them fly when the Trebuchet rock hits em.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Would love to see your face when you consider the US military, which hasn’t won a real war in nearly 80 years, trying to occupy an area 10 times the size of Afghanistan. Please just ignore the 100 million gun-toting good old boys in trucks. I am sure they have no idea what guerilla warfare is and won’t protect their homes at all. Also, I’m sure none of that military will defect to protect their families.

        Those 50 jets and 50 tanks will definitely end the conflict in the first hour.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Um what? Sorry but you are wrong on so many levels it’s concerning.

          The Afghanistan forces we fought weren’t just a military force scratched together from random people off the street. They were at the time battle hardened men in their 30s and 40s, who’s leadership was trained and initially train by US advisors to fight off the USSR. They were a strong force fighting in home territory. (the same goes for the VietCong, and Once North Korea was supported by Standing army of China. The Korean War was lost.) so in reality the “good old boys” don’t have that advantage.

          Secondly, those wars were lost in part due to Logistics. Fighting a war on the other side of the world is vastly different than one in your own back yard. Our opponents knew they just needed to wait us out. That would not happen in the south.

          Next, the politics behind this wars was odious from the beginning. The vast majority of Americans didn’t support the wars over seas. A war against the south would be very popular in the north and mostly popular in urban areas in the south. Remember, the south wouldn’t be trying to leave to create another American Democracy. It would be for a Christian Nationalist Oligarchy. Their goal would be to reinstate slavery, women suffrage, and the genocide of LGBTQ+ people.

          And finally, the military is politically “conservative” but in the economic way and not in the I think my small town with two black people is getting too ethnic way. There would be some military people that would defect, but far fewer than it would take to weaken the US military. Individuals with strong racist beliefs wash out very quickly and definitely are not in leadership! There’s a reason the military makes sure units are made up of people from all walks of life. Bigotry of any kind doesn’t make an effective fighting force.

    • halferect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also remember that most red states are welfare states that need federal funding to just exist and on their own they would be broke and unable to provide basic needs like water and electricity .

      • Cobrachickenwing@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most of those states would collapse at the next hurricane that hits them. Florida had to declare a natural disaster just from 1 hurricane. Hurricane Katrina would leave Louisiana a third world country if not for federal government funds.

    • TopShelfVanilla@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s also like they can’t even conceive the notion that most of the left and even a good few liberals are armed and train regularly and also live out in podunk.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Based on international law the states would maintain their current borders, that means the urban areas would come along for the ride (IF under an actual referendum the majority was to vote in favor of separation vs the non democratic exercise that is US elections)

      The movement would probably see the creation of a new Union instead of just having a bunch of small new countries, so it would be rich enough to equip itself and create an army (and those voting in favor would probably jump on the occasion to defend their new country).

      Separation doesn’t happen overnight, you go and fetch support from other countries so you’re not left without any allies or international recognition if the vote is in favor (France was ready to recognize Quebec if any of the two referendums had been in favor of independence).

      You didn’t create a “best case scenario”, you just created a scenario that fits your opinion on the subject.

      Disclaimer: Am not from the USA, would gladly see it getting split in multiple countries just like I would gladly see Canada split in multiple countries as I think in both cases it would stop some parts of the country from slowing down progress in other parts. Ex.: If Mississippi and its citizens want to live in a third world country so much then so be it, let the rest of the US move forward.

      • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sorry, but wrong on many points. If the conservative states were ever going to leave the Union it would have to be a quick transition as a longer process ensures that it won’t happen.

        One: The US as a whole is far more homogeneous than European democracies. It’s not like in Europe where you can drive a few hours and find a whole different language and culture. Those asking for a separation are a extreme minority even within their states. Even with them being in power, the moment they actually move towards separation they literally will be murdered in a few days.

        Two: during the slow negotiation for separation, red states would be responsible for their debts. States like Mississippi and Kentucky would have to back out of the separation because they’d become Haiti (economically) once the separation was complete.

        Three: even if they peacefully negotiated with blue states, violence would break out in urban areas because red states wouldn’t be leaving to create their own American style for of democracy. It would be a Christan Nationalist oligarchy. They want this separation to reinstate slavery, women’s suffrage, and genicide of all LGBTQ+ individuals. This one is inevitable regardless how the separation goes. But a slow separation just gives those urban areas time to prepare for war.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Many states are in a much better position than many existing countries. Just because you refuse to consider it doesn’t make it non feasible.

          You get to have your go at a thought experiment but others you disagree with don’t get to do the same?

          Edit: Have yet to see someone explain why, for example, Iceland can be an independent country but it’s impossible to imagine Texas or the Carolinas being independent countries except for “People who don’t agree would revolt and the US would bomb the place!” Is it so hard to imagine a future where both sides agree that the union experiment didn’t work and it’s better to just split the country in chunks than continue with the status quo? Even for a thought experiment? Use that wonderful thing we call “imagination”.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Just looking at GDP/capita you can see that there are many red States that are above many European countries. The most popular example obviously is Texas at a secessionist movement has existed there for a very very long time… They have access to the ocean, a border with Mexico, resources… If they left it would probably lead to a movement where other states would want to join them to create the “United Republics of America” (to keep with the Republican theme)…

              • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Just don’t have an extreme weather event or have any of their people with healthcare, who do you think pays to pick up the pieces? GDP/capita is not the final answer.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If you go by that logic then the USA in general can’t work as a country when compared with most other first world nations because all bad events always ends up being worse there than elsewhere. Guess the US should just reintegrate the British Empire then 🤷

              • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Texas is going purple, though. The many, many people there that live there and are Democrats, are they going to be cool with turning it into a totally shithole country?

              • ShoeboxKiller@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Texas’ GDP is what it is because it’s part of the United States.

                You’re so simple you think Texas could secede from the United States and the companies and industries that promote that GDP would stay there? If clueless was a person it’s be you.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Ain’t that the whole point of common law? There’s no legal framework -> go to court -> set the precedent -> there’s your framework

                  Separatists have to support each others, my nation’s separatist movement is older than anyone alive today. If some US states feel like they would be better off outside the union then good on them, the super nation experiment has run its course, it’s the same as empires of ages past and I don’t see anyone here defending the British Empire and being against Canada’s Confederation or saying that Haiti should still be a French colony… Weird how hard it is to apply equal standards to everyone 🤷

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    And then blue states can stop funding red states and the red states will crumble even further.

    Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least… can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they’re red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20140304131138/http://fuckthesouth.com/

    • millie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      We really need to do this. Leave them to their own devices and let them reap the results of their politics instead of shielding them.

  • Iwasondigg@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The 14th amendment prohibits her from serving in congress. Period. Unequivocally. Are we going to start enforcing laws or not?

          • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            People are against you here because they’re rightfully angry and want you to be wrong but you’re right. You can SAY whatever political opinion you want and nothing will happen so long as you’re not telling people to do something and they do it, that’s inciting.

            If she acts upon these statements then she’s in trouble but just saying “I think we should secede” is protected under free speech. If she says “I think we should take up arms against democrat tyrants” and some nut jobs start killing those they perceive to be democrats, then she’s in trouble because she told them to do commit a crime and is therefore an accomplice of said crime.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I might be in the minority, but I say let 'em go: provided they take a proportional amount of the US debt with them, and give back all the military assets that the rest of the country bought. They can re-staff all those military bases they named after Confederates on their own dime, while paying back debt and funding their own Social Security.

    I bet once they actually get presented the budget for their ideas, all of a sudden they decide they like the Blue states (and their tax base) a lot more than they used to.

    • CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I fully agree, fuck em. What do they contribute, cotton? I’m willing to pay higher prices for imported goods to get rid of those racist pricks once and for all.

      • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        We’d have to move Kennedy Space Center to Guam or something. There’s a good, nonpolitical reason it’s in Florida.

          • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            No. Favorable orbital mechanics given Florida’s location, plus failed rockets and staging can fall into the Atlantic instead of over land. Hawai’i would be another option but the natives would protest the fuck out of it and only some of them care about money more than their ideology.

    • Mostly_Gristle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know about the debt thing, but I’ve had a fantasy for a while that some place like Florida decides to secede, and that attracts all the conservative chuds, white supremacists, and christo-fascists, who all rush to move down there to have their “revolution.” Then we just wall Florida off the way they wanted to do with Mexico. The conservatives can have the ultra-capitalist nightmare they’ve always wanted to build, and the rest of us can get on with life and finally have socialized healthcare and properly funded schools.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe we keep the coasts for launching things like boats and so on. Let them have the very worst parts of the state that are already full “Florida man” anyway and a small sliver of the coast and tell all the cons to move on down to their conservative paradise. We normal Americans will keep everything of value and of military strategic importance and they can have their Jesusland.

    • NABDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bullshit. Those bases belong to us. They can build their own.

      Tough shit if they don’t like a Yankee military base in their state.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, they can keep the bases, we would take all the equipment, ammo, and tech. Let whoever decides to stay behind defend the base with their own personal ammo stash.

        • I wonder how far the first US military convoy out of a seceding state would make it from the base they were cleaning out before Y’all Qaeda decided to capturing the equipment and ammo.

    • jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to find this top level comment I thought I was going to have to make myself. Fuck them. Let them secede. Good luck lol they’ll need it.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        That would be the fairest way to do it, of course, but there would be some poetic justice in making it proportional to the seceding state’s electoral vote weight.

        • mwguy@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think there’s some states that should take that deal. North Dakota has a $22b strategic reserve and would only owe ~$75b as a share of it’s national debt. It could turn itself into a cold, shale oil, Dubai.

  • Bwaz@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, wow. Texas, Missouri, Alabama, etc. become not our problem anymore? Gimme a petition to sign!

    • Edgarallenpwn@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyday I wish that Illinois will adopt St Louis. So tired of this shit state but I’m stuck here taking care of parents and grandparents.

    • IHaveTwoCows@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Here’s how to do it: 1- grant secession, cutting off all federal money and removing all military equipment.

      2- stage a bombing by the Confederates against the Union

      3- declare war immediately. Have a swift victory

      4-re-absorb the Confederates as US territories with no representation or voting rights and regulate their commerce.

  • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    Ελληνικά
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 year ago

    Section 3.

    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

    Sounds like she should be removed from Congress.

    • kboy101222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      God I hate to support this ghoul, but it does say “engaged in” or “given aid to”. She’s given support for an insurrection, and if one happened I imagine she’d be impeachable due to both statements, but until then she’d be covered under the 1st amendment

        • kboy101222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          She should definitely be held accountable for that, yeah. But not this. This is actual freedom of speech

    • randon31415@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      |But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

      Never saw that part before. Does that mean that a person supporting insurrection causes the government to have a disability, that someone supporting insurrection is disabled and can be removed with a 2/3rds vote, or they are automatically barred execpt if 2/3rd vote to remove the restriction?

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        Ελληνικά
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not sure if you are being facetious, but it means that you can’t be part of the government unless 2/3rds of each house of Congress votes to allow you to participate in the federal government again.

        Interestingly, it doesn’t say that you get your elected position back, just that you can hold office again.

        So in this case, MTG would be removed, her seat would be filled by whatever process Georgia has for replacing a Congressional Rep. If (and it’s a big if since a good chunk of her own party dislikes her) she gets a 2/3rds vote from the House and the Senate, then she would be able to run for office again. I think. It would probably be a constitutional crisis that would get kicked to the SC either way.

  • darctones@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 year ago

    America’s power is that we are one nation with access to two oceans and friendly neighbors. Our greatest threat is from within.

    • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest, with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer. If it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us; it cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.

      –Abraham Lincoln

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s do a quick thought experiment and say there was an actual legal framework for states to leave the union. How do Republicans think that would go? Under no circumstances would any major city in the south go along with leaving. Republicans states are far more purple than elections would suggest due to voter suppression, election fraud, and gerrymandering. So in reality the confederate areas would just be poor rural areas. Add in the fact that the US holds the keys to all the military equipment and weapons, the confederate areas would turn into a lawless hell scape over night. And without nuclear weapons and no international agreements for defense, I’m sure Mexico and Cuba would love to reclaim some of their lost territory.

      I can go on. But the main reason these idiots keep bringing this up is to suggest violence into getting their way. It’s not even a viable option to even consider for them. The situation I made is a best case scenario for them to. If they tried to violently leave the union it would be couple million good old boys in trucks up against jets and tanks.

      • mriguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        We look at the definition of treason in the Constitution, conclude that unless we can prove she’s acting on behalf of a foreign power, it isn’t treason, call it sedition, which it clearly IS, and go from there.

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          23
          ·
          1 year ago

          Clearly eh?

          “Sedition usually involves actually conspiring to disrupt the legal operation of the government and is beyond expression of an opinion or protesting government policy.”

          I love when liberals just want to throw out the first amendment…

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              1 year ago

              As an elected official she is allowed a political opinion. Even an unpopular one. The first amendment protections for political speech are very strong.

              She needs to have done something or supported something in furtherance of that goal.

              • FabioTheNewOrder@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ah-eh, support of the sedicious insurrection happened on January the 6th 2022 is still not enough to be qualified as “something”?

                I love when conservatives pull shit like these comments out of their brains to defend the human garbage they voted into Congress

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  rofl - not a conservative buddy. Not by a long-shot. I’m just not a blind partisan who thinks laws mean what I want them to mean.

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  And just to remind people - there was a time when preaching “communist views” was seen as “seditious”.

              • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                And everyone else is allowed their opinions too. And the idea that someone who wants to dissolve the country shouldn’t be in Congress doesn’t seem like it should be that controversial.

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “Shouldn’t” and “can’t” are very different things. She absolutely shouldn’t be in congress. But that doesn’t mean we can interpret laws anyway we want.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s do a quick thought experiment and say there was an actual legal framework for states to leave the union. How do Republicans think that would go? Under no circumstances would any major city in the south go along with leaving. Republicans states are far more purple than elections would suggest due to voter suppression, election fraud, and gerrymandering. So in reality the confederate areas would just be poor rural areas. Add in the fact that the US holds the keys to all the military equipment and weapons, the confederate areas would turn into a lawless hell scape over night. And without nuclear weapons and no international agreements for defense, I’m sure Mexico and Cuba would love to reclaim some of their lost territory.

      I can go on. But the main reason these idiots keep bringing this up is to suggest violence into getting their way. It’s not even a viable option to even consider for them. The situation I made is a best case scenario for them to. If they tried to violently leave the union it would be couple million good old boys in trucks up against jets and tanks.

  • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only reason I’m not an advocate for this is because this would mean abandoning LGBT people, minorities, and women in red states.

    • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I live in Texas, and I’d favor this heavily only if the US allowed us non-crazies out first, gave us refugee status and then some financial support to those of us who need it to get started again in a sane state. Getting a new job + place to live is hard.

      Then all the hateful assholes can go live in Bigotriopia all they want without us pesky compassionate types.

      Bye Texas! Bye Florida! Bye Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi! I’m sure y’all’ll get a few years to live in your Happy Hatred before the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean swallows y’all up!

        • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          No lie, that’s actually my biggest fear. I’d have never moved to Texas if Uncle Sam didn’t make me, and I have no idea how long the military will keep me stationed here.

          It’s one of those things that I have to tamp down on my anxiety brain, otherwise I can truly envision a genuine Handmaid’s tale or Mad Max scenario, where women are just constantly impregnated.

          Do I think it’s likely? No. But anxiety doesn’t gaf about likelihood 😭

          I’m not technically past child rearing age, but I’m in my mid-30s so I’m pretty goddamned close to it. I did change my residence to Texas last year, specifically to vote in the elections, and I was a Deputy Registrar so I did voter drives to register others to vote…but we saw how well that worked out last fall.

          I’m fighting while I’m stuck here, but the second that the military moves me, I’m out. Changing my state of residence. Removing all ties to Texas. Etc.

          When Abbott was voted in again, I had to try very hard to not be like "“Whelp. Fuck you Texas. You get what you voted for.”

          • JoJoGAH@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fist bump to a fellow election volunteer! Ahhhgreed, being given visuals of the worst case scenario on the tv fuels “what ifs” anxiety brain! I wish us all luck and spirit

      • CoderKat@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Only problems are kids and that I fear that they’d do their best to keep some people from leaving.

        There’ll always be new kids, many who will be minorities (particularly, even the biggotedest biggot can have an LGBT kid). We can’t do a lot to protect them if they’re in different countries. Though it’s admittedly questionable if we’re able to protect them that much today. There certainly are a lot of blatantly fascist laws being struck down by courts, at the very least.

        And where women are concerned, I worry that if enough people left, these Y’allqaeda would eventually panic and try to restrict them. I mean, controlling women is one of their favourite pastimes and they love to view women as nothing more than baby factories. I wouldn’t put it past them to at least try to prevent people from leaving. There’s also things like how they clearly turn their heads away from migrant workers (while at the same time being unbelievably racist towards them). They seem to recognize that their economy depends on underpaid, exploited workers and I fear what they’d do when they recognize that.

    • JoJoGAH@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I thank you sincerely as a woman in a red state with some blue dots. I’m past raising kids and have a good job, I truly feel I am of more use here for the time being. I’m the only one makng sure several people know that there are differing view points from theirs. With all the cognative dissonance I can stand and a kind delivery, they get a chance to understand what “all these crazy libruls” are on about. I have an Aunt and cousins that live in mtg district, but they’ve been beyond my scope since Obama. I’ve decided on my qualifiers for when I’d leave but I have people here that would need me and that I want to be here for. I guess we’ll all just see right? Cheers

    • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve never understood this argument. If the Republicans take the presidency in 2024 and there’s no significant response, all of those people will experience the same “abandonment”, only they’ll have nowhere to go.

    • coffeeaddict@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why people are favoring secession of states over literal election results? Do you think Texas and Florida or Idaho or whatever is filled with republicans? Have you ever looked up the popular vote on these states?

    • vivavideri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would rent a bus and start picking people up. I know it’s not that simple, but I’m sure we could figure it out

    • Zealousideal_Fox900@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      My solution: LGBTQIA+ and vulnerable persons Evacuation scheme. They get you on a bus the fuck out of there to somwhere like California or New York or Massachusetts.

  • 2piradians@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    She should still be raving and slurring her words relatively harmlessly in some dive bar, but nooooooo…Georgia had to go and get her elected.