The posting of interest is:
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/could-calexit-create-a-left-right-confederacy/
What James Ronald Kennedy (He has a twin who is a leading neo-Confederate) hopes is that there might develop a left/right alliance for secession and nullification.
http://www.kennedytwins.com/
This is not so fanciful. There was a left/right alliance against American overseas military adventures and some of the leftists were quite angry to be called out on it.
There are certainly a fair number of idiots who call themselves leftists who would support such an alliance for secession.
Nullification is an inanity which basically nullifies a nation's existence. If on some rationalization or some interpretation of the Constitution a state can nullify a federal law, you essentially don't have a nation. You just have 50 separate nations arising from the dissolution of the nation.
What is of interest is that the neo-Confederates are still on the prowl for some way to break up the nation. James Ronald Kennedy and his brother Walter Donald Kennedy get published in the Confederate Veteran, the official publication of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and have their books sold by this organization. The SCV has 30,000 members and significant resources and a headquarters which is substantial. This is not a group with a shack and a few members. They are able to promote ideas to a significant base.
The Abbeville Institute is also doing a reveal here. This is campaigning for the break up of the nation.
I have been discussing on this blog the Texas Nationalist movement. They are moribund at this time and will be until it starts appearing that Trump will not be able to carry out his agenda.
However, I think the neo-Confederates are perhaps also seeing hope for the revival of their agenda with the expected "blue wave" in which Democrats are expected to recapture control of the U.S. House. With the Democrats controlling the U.S. House the Democrats hope to undermine Donald Trump and go after Donald Trump in every and any way they can.
The group 538 looking at the polls sees a good chance that the Democrats will capture the House. They see a 6 out of 7 chance which is a really good chance. However as 538 states, it isn't 100% chance.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/
One thing the website shows is that with computers you can easily do all sorts of analyses. When I first started my engineering career, you did statistics with a pencil and paper or mechanical calculator if you were a student or an ordinary engineer. By the time of the end of my career I was routinely doing fairly sophisticated analysis with JMP software.
This is a rather detailed break down of the possible results for the U.S. House elections.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/?ex_cid=rrpromo
The U.S. Senate is expected to remain in the hands of the Republicans. Odds are 5 to 6.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/senate/?ex_cid=rrpromo
So even if the U.S. House does fall into Democratic Party hands, it remains to be seen how much they can actually undermine Trump's agenda. I am sure they can certainly cause problems for Trump and I am very sure they can heat up the political situation even more than it is, a whole lot more.
However, the path of developments to support secession may work this way.
The Democrats in the U.S. House may not be able to hinder Trump as much as inflame an already quite polarized situation such that when in 2020 elections Trump is possibly defeated there will be a radicalized and really alienated base to support secession.
If the Democrats win in 2020 the so-called "left" secession movements will collapse. The right wing ones secessionist movements will start gaining support.
James Ronald Kennedy's idea of a left/right secession alliance developing is wrong. If the left is in control of the government the left secessionist movement will be moribund. If the right is in control of the government the right secession movements will be moribund. They won't be active at the same time.
However, I think Nov. 6, 2018 election will need to be over so we know what the political landscape. Also, it won't be until after Jan. 3, 2019 that we will know what the Democrats will be be doing. However, I think the Democrats have likely already been planning a fair amount as to what they want to do, so I think that the conflict with Trump will start immediately after Jan. 3, 2019.
However, between Nov. 6, 2018 to Jan. 3, 2019 there will likely be statements from the Democrats what they intend to do, speculation about what the Democrats will do, calls from groups as to what the Democrats should do, and right wing fear mongering on what the Democrats will do.
So between Nov. 6, 2018 and Jan. 3, 2019, I think secessionists will pick up some interest from the Trump base of supporters but not in terms of supporting secession. I think that the impetus of most Trump supporters will be to support Trump and not support secession. I think though privately they might give it some thought as I said, as a Plan B.
However, there is likely to be some Trump supporters which will decide that secession has become their option of choice and since the secession movements are somewhat small, even a very small fraction of the Trump base of supporters would be a big increase for the secessionist movement.
We are going to just have to wait until the evening of Nov. 6th or even the morning on Nov. 7th to see where things are heading.
My expectation is the Democrats will win control of the U.S. House and things will start heating up very shortly after the election results are known.
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California. Show all posts
Saturday, October 27, 2018
Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Nigel Farage should be denied entry to the U.S. Trump is derelict in allowing him to enter the nation
It turns out that two major Brexit movement politicians, Nigel Farage and Aaron Banks, were allowed in the United States and raised funds for a new movement to break up California. This is the article:
http://sfist.com/2017/03/26/latest_calexit_gambit_split_califor.php
They should be declared undesirable aliens and not allowed in the U.S. again.
Commitment to democracy is accepting the results of an election you lost.
The boundaries of American states are somewhat capricious and formed for one reason or another over history. I supposed they could be draw again in 30 different ways that would make some sense. However, we don't need 900 states with 1,800 senators. Every geographic region can find some pretext to being divided further.
This is destabilizing to the United States and is a hostile act.
Every place needs two parties in opposition to each other. It helps keep both parties somewhat more honest and better behaved. Having areas where one party is completely dominant without effective opposition is not good, whether it be Republican or Democrat.
I am not necessarily opposed to all plans for rationalization of state boundaries. If they wanted to keep the number of states fixed to 50 but re-apportion according to population and maybe have states with one senator that might be interesting, but even then I would want to carefully think through all possible ramifications and consequences both immediate and over generations.
And this is what should be considered when you start talking about creating states. It opens up many questions as to what purpose the existence of states serve and the current system of states. They are largely the happenstance of history. In the 21st century we expect equal representation, and don't live in the 18th century where states had property requirements for voting.
One time in the 1970s I got out an atlas and in looking up the population of the states realized that 10% of the population gets 40% of the U.S. Senate and 40% of the population gets 10% of the U.S. Senate. If this gets generally considered I think that 40% of the under represented might not be very happy about it.
http://sfist.com/2017/03/26/latest_calexit_gambit_split_califor.php
They should be declared undesirable aliens and not allowed in the U.S. again.
Commitment to democracy is accepting the results of an election you lost.
The boundaries of American states are somewhat capricious and formed for one reason or another over history. I supposed they could be draw again in 30 different ways that would make some sense. However, we don't need 900 states with 1,800 senators. Every geographic region can find some pretext to being divided further.
This is destabilizing to the United States and is a hostile act.
Every place needs two parties in opposition to each other. It helps keep both parties somewhat more honest and better behaved. Having areas where one party is completely dominant without effective opposition is not good, whether it be Republican or Democrat.
I am not necessarily opposed to all plans for rationalization of state boundaries. If they wanted to keep the number of states fixed to 50 but re-apportion according to population and maybe have states with one senator that might be interesting, but even then I would want to carefully think through all possible ramifications and consequences both immediate and over generations.
And this is what should be considered when you start talking about creating states. It opens up many questions as to what purpose the existence of states serve and the current system of states. They are largely the happenstance of history. In the 21st century we expect equal representation, and don't live in the 18th century where states had property requirements for voting.
One time in the 1970s I got out an atlas and in looking up the population of the states realized that 10% of the population gets 40% of the U.S. Senate and 40% of the population gets 10% of the U.S. Senate. If this gets generally considered I think that 40% of the under represented might not be very happy about it.
Thursday, March 02, 2017
Rasmussen pollsters play with fire. Unpatriotic Repulicans
Rasmussen Reports has released this poll.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2017/41_of_republicans_say_america_won_t_be_hurt_if_california_goes_solo
In the poll only 60% feel that it would be bad if California became another country. It really should be 90% or more and those who disagree should be considered cranks. The percentage that think that it would be a good idea is 18%.
Unfortunately the numbers thinking that it would be good if California became another country is driven by partisanship by Republicans of whom 25% thought it would be a good idea.
The headlines used by Rasmussen Reports need to be read carefully. They say that 41% of Republicans don't think America would be hurt by California secession which is 25% who are for it and 16% who say it would have no impact.
It seems that a lot of Americans don't see the obvious advantages of being in a continental nation or they don't think that these questions have real consequences, but are really just hypothetical and in the realm of fantasy.
Given that we have hundreds of statues in American honoring secessionists we should not be surprised that secession is legitimized and people are open to this really stupid idea.
Please consider the following petition.
https://www.change.org/p/edward-h-sebesta-ask-president-trump-not-to-send-a-wreath-to-the-arlington-confederate-monument
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2017/41_of_republicans_say_america_won_t_be_hurt_if_california_goes_solo
In the poll only 60% feel that it would be bad if California became another country. It really should be 90% or more and those who disagree should be considered cranks. The percentage that think that it would be a good idea is 18%.
Unfortunately the numbers thinking that it would be good if California became another country is driven by partisanship by Republicans of whom 25% thought it would be a good idea.
The headlines used by Rasmussen Reports need to be read carefully. They say that 41% of Republicans don't think America would be hurt by California secession which is 25% who are for it and 16% who say it would have no impact.
It seems that a lot of Americans don't see the obvious advantages of being in a continental nation or they don't think that these questions have real consequences, but are really just hypothetical and in the realm of fantasy.
Given that we have hundreds of statues in American honoring secessionists we should not be surprised that secession is legitimized and people are open to this really stupid idea.
Please consider the following petition.
https://www.change.org/p/edward-h-sebesta-ask-president-trump-not-to-send-a-wreath-to-the-arlington-confederate-monument
Thursday, December 08, 2016
The reactionary idiocy of California secession/ Need for the government to have a counter strategy
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-07/how-to-make-california-great-secede-with-a-little-help-from-putin
The link above is to an article in Bloomberg about the California secessionists getting help from Putin and working with a reactionary group there.
This is also a good example on how some ideas that are put forth as left are really reactionary.
The head of the group, Louis Marinelli, lives in Russia teaching English.
The fundamental measure of support for democracy is the willingness to accept defeat at the polls. You really aren't a believer in democracy if you can't having lost an election. I don't mean that you can't be vocal in expression dissatisfaction with the results.
When an election is run and the results come in there will most often be an uneven distribution of results across the geography of the political unit. In one part of a political unit your faction or party or program will likely have majority support. Breaking up the political unit isn't the solution. Such a plan of secession taken to its logical conclusion results in a republic of a city block or a farm.
According to the article the Russians are working with far-left parties as well as extreme right groups to undermine European states and evidently this program is now extending to California. There is a position paper on Russian support for far-left European parties online by Political Capitol in Hungary. I don't know anything about them, but this is the link in the Bloomberg article.
http://www.statecraft.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Peter%20Kreko%20Far%20Left%20definitive.pdf
The secessionists might consider that not everyone will want boundaries and divisions in North America and to divide the continent into many small states that will inevitably quarrel. One of the great thing about North America is that most of the land mass is divided among three states, Canada, United States of America, and Mexico, and three states on relatively good terms, at least compared to some other areas of the globe.
I think a lot of the media reporting portrays secessionists in the United States as some type of amusing novelty and doesn't take it seriously. I don't think the United States government is doing anything at all to think of counter strategies. They should.
A counter strategy should NOT be to oppress secessionists by arresting them or some other act of official oppression. What needs to be done is formulate a strategy that utilizes a theoretical understanding of nationalism and what drives separatism and using that knowledge devise counter strategies.
For example Cinco de Mayo is about Hispanics in California supporting the Union against the Confederacy, which is both anti-secessionist and also a national narrative. The major Hispanic holiday in the United States is about Hispanic Californians defending the American nation against secession. I don't think the story of the origins of Cinco de Mayo is generally known, it should be as a first step against California secession to make sure that it is more generally known.
In opposing Daniel Miller's program of Texas secession I think it would be relatively easy to show it is really a movement basing itself on a white nationalist history of Texas and negates the African American and Hispanic experience in Texas.
For Southern nationalism I suggest that it ought to be considered where the dividing line is between "Southern Studies" and southern nationalism is. In fact it could be asked whether there is really a boundary at all, and if Southern Studies isn't really the venue of a Southern nationalist intelligentsia.
Also, an examination of the constructedness of the "South" should be done. John Shelton Reed in an article written under a pseudonym, J.R. Vanover, in Southern Partisan, was denouncing the term Southeastern because it was a term that people were using and he saw it as inimical to Southern nationalism. I think the antidote to Southern nationalism is a program of real regional studies and let states in the southern part of the Unites States out of the prison house of the Confederacy and southern nationalism.
These are just initial ideas I have to oppose separatism in America. I think a small group of academics could probably over a year come up with a fairly good program what would put a stop to various secessionist movements.
The link above is to an article in Bloomberg about the California secessionists getting help from Putin and working with a reactionary group there.
This is also a good example on how some ideas that are put forth as left are really reactionary.
The head of the group, Louis Marinelli, lives in Russia teaching English.
The fundamental measure of support for democracy is the willingness to accept defeat at the polls. You really aren't a believer in democracy if you can't having lost an election. I don't mean that you can't be vocal in expression dissatisfaction with the results.
When an election is run and the results come in there will most often be an uneven distribution of results across the geography of the political unit. In one part of a political unit your faction or party or program will likely have majority support. Breaking up the political unit isn't the solution. Such a plan of secession taken to its logical conclusion results in a republic of a city block or a farm.
According to the article the Russians are working with far-left parties as well as extreme right groups to undermine European states and evidently this program is now extending to California. There is a position paper on Russian support for far-left European parties online by Political Capitol in Hungary. I don't know anything about them, but this is the link in the Bloomberg article.
http://www.statecraft.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Peter%20Kreko%20Far%20Left%20definitive.pdf
The secessionists might consider that not everyone will want boundaries and divisions in North America and to divide the continent into many small states that will inevitably quarrel. One of the great thing about North America is that most of the land mass is divided among three states, Canada, United States of America, and Mexico, and three states on relatively good terms, at least compared to some other areas of the globe.
I think a lot of the media reporting portrays secessionists in the United States as some type of amusing novelty and doesn't take it seriously. I don't think the United States government is doing anything at all to think of counter strategies. They should.
A counter strategy should NOT be to oppress secessionists by arresting them or some other act of official oppression. What needs to be done is formulate a strategy that utilizes a theoretical understanding of nationalism and what drives separatism and using that knowledge devise counter strategies.
For example Cinco de Mayo is about Hispanics in California supporting the Union against the Confederacy, which is both anti-secessionist and also a national narrative. The major Hispanic holiday in the United States is about Hispanic Californians defending the American nation against secession. I don't think the story of the origins of Cinco de Mayo is generally known, it should be as a first step against California secession to make sure that it is more generally known.
In opposing Daniel Miller's program of Texas secession I think it would be relatively easy to show it is really a movement basing itself on a white nationalist history of Texas and negates the African American and Hispanic experience in Texas.
For Southern nationalism I suggest that it ought to be considered where the dividing line is between "Southern Studies" and southern nationalism is. In fact it could be asked whether there is really a boundary at all, and if Southern Studies isn't really the venue of a Southern nationalist intelligentsia.
Also, an examination of the constructedness of the "South" should be done. John Shelton Reed in an article written under a pseudonym, J.R. Vanover, in Southern Partisan, was denouncing the term Southeastern because it was a term that people were using and he saw it as inimical to Southern nationalism. I think the antidote to Southern nationalism is a program of real regional studies and let states in the southern part of the Unites States out of the prison house of the Confederacy and southern nationalism.
These are just initial ideas I have to oppose separatism in America. I think a small group of academics could probably over a year come up with a fairly good program what would put a stop to various secessionist movements.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Asked Tim Donnelly to disavow his support for the Confederate flag.
I have finished with some other research business and I am starting to follow up with contacting people in California. I would like to see State Senator Stephen Knight be not re-elected if he doesn't disavow his vote for the Confederate flag. I am letting various people in California know about the neo-Confederate movement.
Tim Donnelly is a member of the California State Assembly. He was the lone vote in defense of the Confederate flag in a recent vote in the California State Assembly.
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-confederate-flag-bill-20140820-story.html
He came in third in the recent Republican primary for governor.
I have asked Mr. Donnelly to reconsider his vote for the Confederate flag. I sent him the following email to his campaign website:
Tim Donnelly is a member of the California State Assembly. He was the lone vote in defense of the Confederate flag in a recent vote in the California State Assembly.
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-confederate-flag-bill-20140820-story.html
He came in third in the recent Republican primary for governor.
I have asked Mr. Donnelly to reconsider his vote for the Confederate flag. I sent him the following email to his campaign website:
Dear Mr. Donnelly:
I learn with regret that you were the lone vote for the
Confederate flag in the California Assembly. When I was young the Republican
Party was the party of Abraham Lincoln and not Jefferson Davis.
I am an investigative academic researcher into the
neo-Confederate movement. I am published by peer reviewed academic journals and
university presses. My resume is online at www.templeofdemocracy.com/resume.htm.
People coming up with rationalizations for neo-Confederacy
enable that movement. At my online resume I think you will find material
which will show why the neo-Confederate movement should not be enabled.
Additionally there are free guest links to the my articles and essays and
reports at “Black Commentator” which I think you will find informative.
I ask you to disavow your vote in the Assembly regarding the
ban on the Confederate flag.
A person who enables the neo-Confederate movement should not
hold any office of public trust.
I hope that you will consider this.
Regards,
Edward H. Sebesta
Co-editor of “Neo-Confederacy: A Critical
Introduction,” Univ. of Texas Press, 2008 (http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html),
and “The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The ‘Great Truth’ About the
‘Lost Cause’” Univ. Press of Mississippi 2010. (http://www.upress.state.ms.us/books/1338).
Author of chapter about the Civil War and Reconstruction in the notorious Texas
teaching standards in Politics and the History Curriculum: The
Struggle over Standards in Texas and the Nation, published by Palgrave
Macmillan. http://www.keitherekson.com/books/politics-and-the-history-curriculum/
Monday, August 25, 2014
California and the Jefferson Davis Highway
Recently the California legislature has made it very clear that they don't care for the Confederate flag.
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-confederate-flag-bill-20140820-story.html
I wonder if the California legislature knows that the California state government is allowing the United Daughters of the Confederacy to claim a stretch of highway as the Jefferson Davis Highway even though the California legislature was against it when they attempted to get an official designation.
I think that asking the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) to move their monuments off state property is a logical thing to ask for next. The UDC had their Jefferson Davis highway monuments given back to them in the State of Washington, California would be next. That would get a trend going and the highway could be rolled back to Texas. Jefferson Davis was very explicit and negative in his opinions about Latin Americans.
I will likely write the whole legislature after the Confederate flag banning bill is signed by the governor.
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-confederate-flag-bill-20140820-story.html
I wonder if the California legislature knows that the California state government is allowing the United Daughters of the Confederacy to claim a stretch of highway as the Jefferson Davis Highway even though the California legislature was against it when they attempted to get an official designation.
I think that asking the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) to move their monuments off state property is a logical thing to ask for next. The UDC had their Jefferson Davis highway monuments given back to them in the State of Washington, California would be next. That would get a trend going and the highway could be rolled back to Texas. Jefferson Davis was very explicit and negative in his opinions about Latin Americans.
I will likely write the whole legislature after the Confederate flag banning bill is signed by the governor.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Secession as a means of segregation, California secession and elsewhere
Tim Draper talks about breaking up California into six states to make them more homogeneous. "Homogeneous" should be seen as a code word for segregated.
His proposal would contain most of California's minorities into a couple urban areas.
His proposal would contain most of California's minorities into a couple urban areas.
Saturday, February 22, 2014
What states secession movements are all about, and the impact they will have and one benefit of the movements.
Did someone's favorite candidate lose a recent election and they can't accept the result of the election? The trend now if you lose an election it seems is to propose secession. That seems to be the strategy of conservatives in parts of some states, usually if not entirely where Democrats are elected to state wide office.
The secession movement is really an attack on Democracy. Frequently a winning candidate in an election will carry some parts of the election district and not others. The solution isn't to divide up the election district, whether it is a nation, state, country or a municipality, on some pretext or another. The idea of secession is an attempt to nullify the results of an election whether in 1860 or today.
The California movement to divide the state into six states has no chance of actually resulting in six states since congress would have to admit them. However, California is foolish enough to have adopted the referendum method of enacting laws and a secession measure might be on the ballot if it gets enough signatures. It will need about 8% of the population. Instead of electing a representative and holding that person accountable for their actions if you live in California you have dozens of proposals for laws on the ballot and no one is really accountable for them.
This secession movement in California will have one result though. It will discredit individuals, political factions, movements, who are seen in support of breaking up California and who there after will be perceived as anti-Californian. If the secession measure gets on the ballot politicians, organizations, and opinion leaders will have to make public stands on this. There could be some severe internal conflicts in the conservative movement in California.
Most importantly if the ballot measure becomes even somewhat close in opinion polling or at the polls secession movements in the United States will suddenly go from being objects of amusement or curiosities to being threatening. Secessionism will be perceived with greater hostility. The Confederacy will be seen more negatively as well as organizations which celebrate it. Monuments to those who sought to break up the United States by violent means will seem less tolerable.
So I think that the progress of the secession proposal in California will be great in terms of defeating the neo-Confederate movement.
Also, it will afford an opportunity to raise issues about the celebration of the Confederacy in California. Perhaps the California state government shouldn't celebrate secession if it doesn't want secession.
What will likely happen is that the measure will fail to get anywhere near the 800,000 signatures required and even if it did get on the ballot do very poorly and secession will be again amusing as the pre-occupation of cranks.
Perhaps if Obama could denounce secession it might get enough signatures through the reflexive response (knee jerk reaction) of a certain fraction of conservatives to get on the ballot. The Democrats might make statements to get a reaction from some conservatives to sign the petition to get the measure on the ballot to cause trouble for the Republicans. Suddenly Republicans would be identified with secession.
The secession movement is really an attack on Democracy. Frequently a winning candidate in an election will carry some parts of the election district and not others. The solution isn't to divide up the election district, whether it is a nation, state, country or a municipality, on some pretext or another. The idea of secession is an attempt to nullify the results of an election whether in 1860 or today.
The California movement to divide the state into six states has no chance of actually resulting in six states since congress would have to admit them. However, California is foolish enough to have adopted the referendum method of enacting laws and a secession measure might be on the ballot if it gets enough signatures. It will need about 8% of the population. Instead of electing a representative and holding that person accountable for their actions if you live in California you have dozens of proposals for laws on the ballot and no one is really accountable for them.
This secession movement in California will have one result though. It will discredit individuals, political factions, movements, who are seen in support of breaking up California and who there after will be perceived as anti-Californian. If the secession measure gets on the ballot politicians, organizations, and opinion leaders will have to make public stands on this. There could be some severe internal conflicts in the conservative movement in California.
Most importantly if the ballot measure becomes even somewhat close in opinion polling or at the polls secession movements in the United States will suddenly go from being objects of amusement or curiosities to being threatening. Secessionism will be perceived with greater hostility. The Confederacy will be seen more negatively as well as organizations which celebrate it. Monuments to those who sought to break up the United States by violent means will seem less tolerable.
So I think that the progress of the secession proposal in California will be great in terms of defeating the neo-Confederate movement.
Also, it will afford an opportunity to raise issues about the celebration of the Confederacy in California. Perhaps the California state government shouldn't celebrate secession if it doesn't want secession.
What will likely happen is that the measure will fail to get anywhere near the 800,000 signatures required and even if it did get on the ballot do very poorly and secession will be again amusing as the pre-occupation of cranks.
Perhaps if Obama could denounce secession it might get enough signatures through the reflexive response (knee jerk reaction) of a certain fraction of conservatives to get on the ballot. The Democrats might make statements to get a reaction from some conservatives to sign the petition to get the measure on the ballot to cause trouble for the Republicans. Suddenly Republicans would be identified with secession.
Friday, September 13, 2013
State secession ideas ridiculed.
In earlier posts on the proposals for parts of states to secede and set up their own states, I said that there was a serious risk to the Republican Party. They would be caught between alienating secessionists which is turning out to be a part of their base, and appearing crazy to everyone else.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2013/09/secession-and-conservatives-or-we-cant.html
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2013/09/maryland-secessionists-want-western.html
Human Events had this article in which the secessionist are supposed to represent some type of oppression of rural residents.
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/09/12/will-california-rural-counties-secede-from-sacramentos-control/
The ridicule of the secessionists has been quick to appear also.
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/13/right_wing_nuts_hatch_batty_secession_schemes/
Joshua Holland in the Salon article points out that the secessionists are those who find they can't get their way on everything anymore and are somewhat shocked by this and are throwing tantrums. But it is also an interesting article showing what the roots of this movement are. It is an interesting read.
Some quotes:
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2013/09/rick_perry_is_a_trendsetter_ot.php
The Wonkette article has some bad language.
http://wonkette.com/528104/secession-is-the-new-orange-which-is-the-new-black-maryland-edition
I think that the Democratic Party is probably very happy to see this secession movement. If it continues to spread and have a presence in the conservative movement it has the potential to seriously damage the credibility of conservatism and cause a lot of problems for the Republican Party.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2013/09/secession-and-conservatives-or-we-cant.html
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2013/09/maryland-secessionists-want-western.html
Human Events had this article in which the secessionist are supposed to represent some type of oppression of rural residents.
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/09/12/will-california-rural-counties-secede-from-sacramentos-control/
The ridicule of the secessionists has been quick to appear also.
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/13/right_wing_nuts_hatch_batty_secession_schemes/
Joshua Holland in the Salon article points out that the secessionists are those who find they can't get their way on everything anymore and are somewhat shocked by this and are throwing tantrums. But it is also an interesting article showing what the roots of this movement are. It is an interesting read.
Some quotes:
The media have framed these stories as a symptom of a growing rural-urban divide, and that’s true. Gun safety laws enacted after the Sandy Hook shootings sparked the move in both Colorado and Maryland. Marriage equality for gays and lesbians, and differences over energy policy, immigration (over which state governments have little control) and taxes are often cited as “irreconcilable differences” by these secession advocates.
But it’s also another sign of the difficulty that a group which dominated American politics just a generation ago – a group political scientist Alan Abramowitz narrowed down to married white people who identify as Christians – are having adapting to a country that’s becoming more diverse and embracing a different, more liberal set of cultural values. As Michael Rosenwald noted in The Washington Post, “with secessionists, the term ‘final straw’ comes up a lot.”And:
It’s certainly true that with less than 20 percent of the population now living in rural America, the policy preferences of conservatives living in the countryside or in small towns are often overshadowed by large majorities who live in cities and their suburbs. But that’s true of a lot of Americans – liberal hipsters in Austin, Texas, don’t have much say in their state’s governance either, to cite just one example among many. But as Jason Bane of the blog ColoradoPols told a local Fox affiliate in Colorado, “in a democracy, there are lots of other people who have viewpoints, and they don’t all throw a tantrum just because a vote doesn’t go their way.”Houston Chronicle blogger is laughing at secessionists. Check out this link:
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2013/09/rick_perry_is_a_trendsetter_ot.php
The Wonkette article has some bad language.
http://wonkette.com/528104/secession-is-the-new-orange-which-is-the-new-black-maryland-edition
I think that the Democratic Party is probably very happy to see this secession movement. If it continues to spread and have a presence in the conservative movement it has the potential to seriously damage the credibility of conservatism and cause a lot of problems for the Republican Party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
