Calexit gets scary in a hurry, even if there's no fight over letting California go.
The process of figuring that out, and perhaps of Canada becoming the world's great superpower (with California and with the bordering state of New York) and essentially needing to disarm a terrified and well-armed US, seems like it cannot possibly be a better plan than California just getting the US to do what it wants in approximately any other way. No one will win except Raytheon and Palantir.
And even if it doesn't get that bad, I would expect a US without California to leave both NATO and NAFTA, either out of spite, out of a clear dominance of the political voices that are currently NATO-skeptic and NAFTA-skeptic (but are being held in check by California's votes), or out of simply not having enough of an economy left where either of them make sense.
Also, California is arguably occupied. It is ruled by a federal government that lost an election by any reasonable measure. It lacks the right to secede due to a federal constitution which violates the generally acknowledged right of peoples to self-determination. Do you think three quarters of the states would ever vote to let the Californian cash cow secede? They milk it for all it's worth, all while complaining that California doesn't know what we're doing.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-f...
I left, but the first thirty years of my life were in California and it's a great place. It could be a lot greater without being yoked to an oppressive system that minimizes its vote, steals its cash, and actively opposes its aims in fields ranging from the environment, to immigration, to education, among others. We should stop pretending the US is united by anything more than coercion by the small states over the large. Would an independent California freely choose to join the US today? If not, perhaps we should reconsider whether this relationship is healthy. Perhaps other states should as well.
The electoral college system our country has used for nearly 250 years is no longer a "reasonable measure" of who won the election?
Suppose there was a little Eastern European country where the election procedures were the same as the USA's. We would certainly criticize them every time the popular vote said A and the weird political procedure said B and got to overrule the popular vote.
In fact, if they had oil or it were otherwise advantageous, we would likely invade, fracture them into smaller countries more amenable to our interests, and then abandon them.
Until this century we mostly just got lucky, with only two misalignments in the 19th century.
We essentially have a rotten borough problem, though few want to acknowledge it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs
Ideally we'd go to preference-based voting, but just eliminating "let's make votes from rural areas vastly more important" as a voting system would be a huge start.
And, that oh-so-important-to-the-rest-of-the-country-farming, is less than 5% of California's GDP.
California's manufacturing sector is enormous. Good luck repairing your planes without California. And medicine? Oh, yeah, that biotech manufacturing goes bye bye. etc.
Our current highly interconnected economies rely on peace. If an actual significant war ever broke out, people would start starving immediately.
True, but that stomach is full of wheat and corn, not celery and kiwi fruit.
"Good luck repairing your planes without California. "
Good luck being able to get a glass of water without the rest of the country. I wonder where trouble would develop first?
Plus, what makes you think that the agricultural counties are going to join your utopia in the first place? Almost all of them voted heavily for Trump.
Noone is gonna starve without california. We might not be able to get avocados during the winter months anymore, but we'll be fine.
What are they planning to use for water?
Do you think that the problem is California or the rest of the USA?
In any case, I don't think California wants to secede.
Sources: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/12/taxing-rich-... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-16/brown-s-c...
California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia.
Governed by boring and competent people like Jerry Brown, it would be a good place to live.
In all seriousness, Trump becoming president shakes my belief in reality. It certainly has made me see that anything truly is possible.
The explaination that the universe is an elaborate simulation seems not just plausible, but really like the most likely explaination.
What seems impossible today is just another run of the mill fact of life tomorrow.
If California gets crushed, the rest of the country will starve.
And you really think that a military that couldn't pacify a city with a bunch of camel jockeys carrying AK-47's could pacify Compton let alone something the size of Los Angeles or San Francisco? Good luck with that.
Calexit won't happen because Californians really don't want it. We're a pretty level-headed bunch even when Cousin Cletus Red State shoots himself in the foot with his loaded gun--again.
The problem is that Trump and the Republicans are incompetent enough to actually do something stupid enough to galvanize Californians the wrong direction. THAT'S the real danger that could cause Calexit.
No, it wouldn't.
You are confusing high-valued luxury foods (e.g., artichokes, almonds, and arugula) with basic calorie sources (e.g., corn and wheat). The latter category is the one that makes the difference when it comes to starvation.
California produces only a very small percentage of our calories. No one is going to starve to death if they can't get fresh arugula in January.
See? That's why Calexit will never happen.
A military occupation shuts down all sectors immediately and they absolutely will not come back up for years. Look at what the Taiwan quake did in semiconductors. Now scale that up.
An orderly exit allows the rest of the country to continue buying California products.
Those in power will do whatever to prevent Calexit from happening in the first place.
And so if Calexit happens, will we have San Diego exit from the Republic of California too?