Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 08:53:38 JST Mr Penguin

   It's time for the governor and legislature of California to declare independence from the United States. He should take back the California national guard and order them to seize federal buildings. Neither Joe nor Trump should have the authority to dictate their whims to all of of the US. Independent nations are more than capable of working together to defend one another against a common enemy and in fact that was the basis of the US's founding. Insurrection was the founding of the american way.

   • Embed this notice
     Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 10:10:35 JST Mr Penguin

     in reply to

     • 👺防空識別區👹

     @adiz

     The US was suppose to be a framework representative 50 independent states for trade and defense, not a single top down authoritarian state. Slavery was invariably going to disappear independent of a civil war (was not the reason for it either, Lincoln didn't free all slaves, he used freeing southern slaves as a move to defeat the southern rebellion) and the resistance of the north has only hurt our long term well being. Many independent states is what we ought to have, not two nations.

   • Embed this notice
     👺防空識別區👹 (adiz@mtl.jinxian.casa)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 10:10:36 JST 👺防空識別區👹

     in reply to

     @mr_penguin So, actually, the Confederacy was based and red-pilled?

   • Embed this notice
     Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 11:03:40 JST Mr Penguin

     in reply to

     • DrFell (Disgruntled Citizen)✅️
     • Flat Moon Theories

     @Sirpantangelini

     @DrFell

     So why fight? I'll agree to surrender to your independence movement if you agree to leave us alone in New Hampshire. And I'll agree to these terms for any other party who wishes the same for their state and/or themselves.

   • Embed this notice
     Flat Moon Theories (sirpantangelini@noauthority.social)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 11:03:41 JST Flat Moon Theories

     in reply to

     • DrFell (Disgruntled Citizen)✅️

     @DrFell @mr_penguin

     Hilarious.

     Also you just get bad California.
     The rest has wanted to be free of yous for some time.

   • Embed this notice
     DrFell (Disgruntled Citizen)✅️ (drfell@freeatlantis.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 11:03:42 JST DrFell (Disgruntled Citizen)✅️

     in reply to

     @mr_penguin
     Buwahaha

   • Embed this notice
     Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 14:30:36 JST Mr Penguin

     in reply to

     • Faelyn

     @Faelyn

     You do realize that the feds get there money from Californians and money handed to the states by the feds are literal bribes. Talk about corruption at its core. It's a terrible supreme court ruling that makes this even possible. This very issue goes back to the days of independence from Great Britan in some respect and whether or not we should even have a strong central government. The weak federal government originally formed was overthrown ~7 years in if memory serves me right. However the decision on whether or not the feds could tax a state's citizens and then use the money to bribe the states is a much much much more recent ruling. I want to say it is a ruling of the last 100 years or so. Prior to the 1910s (? AND that is despite government education existing) governments were smaller including the federal government and taxation was comparatively low. California would be better off as an independent nation just as New Hampshire would be. This may not be the case in economic terms for all the peoples in every state. Mississippi for instance would probably be worse off economically, but maybe not. Its a poor state that receives a lot of federal aid, but as an independent country it wouldn't necessarily have to contribute to funding the war machine which is the greatest economic burden at a federal level. Eliminate that cost and incomes almost double. Eliminate taxes incomes more than double leaving poverty almost nonexistent at least among the majority of those with the lowest incomes.

     fu likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Faelyn (faelyn@noauthority.social)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 14:30:37 JST Faelyn

     in reply to

     @mr_penguin

     You are aware that the Federal Gov’t pays most of the cost of keeping the California NATIONAL Guard, right?

     Same with all the States. I worked for State of CA and I know we billed the Feds religiously.

   • Embed this notice
     Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 14:35:00 JST Mr Penguin

     in reply to

     • StarProphet

     @StarProphet

     Ohh city states might just be an even grander idea, but we will probably need to start by focusing on the great national governments of the world to diminish and dismantle the biggest threats to the world. Then focus on city states. And finally individuals as the best governments are the ones in the individuals own control.

   • Embed this notice
     StarProphet (starprophet@noauthority.social)'s status on Thursday, 12-Jun-2025 14:35:02 JST StarProphet

     in reply to

     @mr_penguin

     Sure, you can have San Fagsicko and LA secede as independent city states. And the rest of California will remain in the Union.

   • Embed this notice
     fu (fu@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 13-Jun-2025 06:10:37 JST fu

     in reply to
     @mr_penguin while I agree with your sentiment, that's going to cause a lot of people to die, particularly if California didn't give up right away. Not that any individuals stand a chance against a nuclear power anyway, but the relatively limited gun rights in California make it all the less likely a Calif-exit would be accepted by the feds.
   • Embed this notice
     Mr Penguin (mr_penguin@social.freetalklive.com)'s status on Saturday, 14-Jun-2025 01:08:54 JST Mr Penguin

     in reply to

     • fu

     @fu

     This is just wrong. The Taliban won in Afghanistan with little more than sticks and rocks. There are different approaches to war, and it is not beyond hope for little people to win out in wars against major adversaries. Often it is the propaganda your spouting that keeps a population in line and powers that be in power. When you believe the propaganda of the enemy you don't even try and trying is 99% of the fight. It's not the physical weapons. It isn't mass violence, though some amount of violence on all sides does tend to occur, but not always. There have been some relatively peaceful independence movements where countries broke away from the Soviet Union with as few as a single death as an example. No, Californians should resist the feds and it is not unlikely that people around the country would support the state. Polls on this suggest something like 1% or maybe it was 10% of the population supports invading a breakaway US state today. The point being it would be a very unpopular war, and continued resistance would be key, not necessarily guns. Keeping troops on the ground is expensive and the population will easily tire of war, particularly an unjustified one of a common people (ie Afghanistan is a foreign population relative to California making it out to easily be an enemy, the US is largely homogeneous and seen as a population that is 'one of us'.).