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

    In Texas v. White’s ruling: There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.

    Scalia’s opinion on the subject was shared as an answer to a letter so it has no legal precedence.

    • Mr_D_Umbguy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      How about all of the information?

      The decision in Texas v. White (1868) held that the U.S. Constitution does not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, while adding, “except through revolution or through consent of the States.” The ruling held null all ordinances of secession and all acts of the state legislatures aimed at secession.

      So states could revolt, although that’s not legal. They could try and get consent of the States, if that were actually feasible. They cannot unilaterally secede which is why this is a dog whistle.

      It’s really telling that you haven’t mentioned the separatist movements of the native tribes in the US, or the movements in Puerto Rico, or the recent calls for it in Hawaii. Groups that arguably have really solid arguments, but instead focus on groups who are upset because they can’t subjugate and control those around them that don’t conform to their ideals.

      Maybe you should emigrate to the US, you certainly have the arrogance and false bravado that Americans often exhibit when talking about matters in countries other than theirs.

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

        Sorry if I gave an example of a state that already has agreed borders and that actually compares to rich nations like I was asked 🤷

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

          You weren’t asked. Yet, again, just like an American you had to chime in.

          I also see you edited one of your comments to add that bit about Iceland. Checked the false equivalence fallacy box with that.

          You’re a shill or a troll, either way I’ll give you no more of my time.

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

              You’re a dumbass. Neither of the people in this thread you’re replying to asked you and your reply to the person who did is stupid. 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
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Can’t wait to see the petrochemical industry pack their things and start extracting Texas’ resources from outside Texas!

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

                  Hey everyone, this idiot I’m replying to can’t even read. Literally from the link:

                  And that also starts to impact the oil market. Yes, Texas has substantial oil reserves. They’re the leading producer of crude oil and natural gas in the USA, and the leading refinder of petroleum products. But of course, that’s all done by foreign companies in the Republic of Texas. Does Texas itself own any oil? Maybe, but I couldn’t find it. Do they Nationalize all petroleum production and send the oil companies running? That’s an annual $223 billion!

                  But here’s the other thing: all oil is currently bought and sold in Petrodollars. You buy oil in dollars, you sell oil in dollars. So the TexBux situation in Texas is a big problem… relative to other things in Texas, the cost of oil will go up. And this dynamic makes Republic of Texas less interesting for investors and oil companies than Texas, USA. Particularly if it’s unstable. Not that, after a century in the Middle East, they’re not strangers to how one gets the best of an unstable country. It’s just never good for that unstable country.

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

                    Don’t bother, they commented on something out of their depth and can’t admit it. Don’t feed the trolls as they say.

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

                    Other nations sell their petrol exploited by private businesses in USD, other nations are rich from that exploitation.

                    Texas doing the same thing though? Nah mate, impossible!

                    And no, “texbux” isn’t an issue as anyone who knows even a tiny bit about economy and politics would tell you, no country can prevent another from using their currency as theirs. That’s why eleven nations other than the USA have USD as their money and the number is even higher when counting countries that peg their currency to the USD’s value.

                    Same for the Euro which is legal tender in some places outside Europe.

                    Maybe you should go check if someone talked about that somewhere on Quora.

                    K bye! 😘