This week, Republican governors across the country escalated their conflict with the Biden administration over the southern border by invoking the same legal theory that slave states wielded to justify secession before the Civil War.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, joined by 25 other GOP governors, now argues that the Biden administration has violated the federal government’s “compact” with the states—an abdication that justifies state usurpation of federal authority at the border.

This language embraces the Confederacy’s conception of the Constitution as a mere compact that states may exit when they feel it has been broken. It’s dangerous rhetoric that transcends partisan grandstanding. And as before, it’s being used to legitimize both nullification and dehumanization.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    If these GOP governors actually gave a shit about fixing the border, they would be pushing the GOP congress to unblock the border bill. But they want the crisis to fester so they can campaign on it.

    Opportunist scum.

    • GroundedGator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      At this point Biden should stretch executive privilege and figure out how to check off as many boxes on the bill that he can. He’s already subverted Congress getting aid to Israel.

      What’s the worst that can happen? They impeach him? They already are determined to at least give that show. I would love to see ComerPyle try to explain how they are impeaching him over increased border security.

      Maybe Texas sues him. Okay Abbot, let’s see how you justify suing the administration for providing more border agents, more tech, more personnel and resources.

      One could argue that the MAGAts in Congress have breached the covenant of 3 coequal branches of government. I would never say that any one branch should act unilaterally, or do so without potential consequence, but this is mad. They are not doing their job, they aren’t debating, and are actively throwing a tantrum like a child.

    • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Speeding towards a 21st century version of American civil war doesn’t seem the smartest thing to do. 🙄

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Civil War in the U.S. is highly unlikely in the current economy. Firstly because big business would never allow that kind of hit to the stock market, but also because you’re not going to get people leaving their families and going to the front lines when everyone is living paycheck-to-paycheck without a draft and good luck with trying to institute a draft.

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          but also because you’re not going to get people leaving their families and going to the front lines when everyone is living paycheck-to-paycheck without a draft and good luck with trying to institute a draft.

          Sure you are. One of the first things every civil war starts out doing is paying soldiery. What better way to lure those living paycheck-to-paycheck than offering them a paycheck AND a cause?

            • PugJesus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Plenty of businessmen who are absolute fucking loons. Just look at the Mypillow guy. Same way the American Revolution got started, and the US Civil War. Rich folk loan the rebel government money either out of idealism or as a bet on the success on the rebels.

              My point isn’t that it’s sustainable. My point is that it’s very possible to lure people who are living paycheck-to-paycheck to get involved in a war at the outset. The issue comes if the war drags on, and the rebel government starts to have trouble paying wages.

            • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              That’s really just a measure of population. Texas is one of the few red “giver” states

              ETA: To answer your question, they could do the same as last time. They would issue confederate promissory notes, which would only have worth if they win. Probably at inflated numbers to appeal to greed and bypass the obvious problems with that idea

        • zigmus64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Also… ya know, a big mismatch in technology. Sure a lot of folks have ARs and shit, some folks have Barret .50 cal sniper rifles. None of them have a fucking AH-64E Apache.

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        As opposed to a 21st century version of the Jim Crow century? Ceding lawful Federal authority to ultraconservative states is nothing less than a cession of the rights of US society to ultraconservative cretins, and is notoriously hard to reverse.

        • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          The GOP has been blackmailing and gaslighting the public with callbacks to Puritanical values for decades, but now their true bigotry is showing and they should be dismissed for the hypocrites they are.

          • PugJesus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yeah. My thinking is that a forceful response by the US government will end up more “Ruby Bridges” than “Sherman’s March”, but we also must be ready for the latter if the GOP proves insane enough to escalate. I think it was Sherman who once wrote that the wages of tolerating secession would be eternal war, as local powers squabble and quarrel and attempt to oppress one another, and the central government becomes powerless and eventually withers away - or becomes authoritarian as people (foolishly) begin to yearn for a ‘strong man’ to restore order.

            • growsomethinggood ()@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              The thing is, Republicans here don’t actually want to escalate, or at least the Republican politicians. They want to scream loudly that whatever Biden does is hurting them, their constituents, and the country, whether it’s “weak” inaction or authoritarian action. It is an election year after all.

              Will the radicalized, bloodthirsty Republican population escalate though? That’s maybe more likely. I’d be more concerned for violence as a minority in these states than as the National Guard.

  • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Hmm some sort of crisis with the south nullifying federal laws. I wonder where we’ve seen that before?

    Im only kidding, this isn’t really the same situation, but there’s definitely shades of gray shared.

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Maybe more relation than you might think.
      The southern border states rely on illegal immigration for cheap labour to suppress wages of citizens.

  • noride@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Even a single red state ‘leaving’ the US would crush their house majority and deprive them of two senators. No way it happens.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah, but they know a Democratic majority in the Senate will have just enough Manchins to be effectively a Republican majority.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I love how you’re downvoted for saying something factually true. It’s so insanely frustrating how much in denial Americans are about Democrats being center-right.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I agree about the centrist part, but not because of Manchin.

          Manchin isn’t some rotating villain conspiracy. He’s from fucking West Virginia. What are you expecting? Dems don’t vote in lockstep, and need more than the slimmest majority to legislate.

          Republicans aren’t much different. It’s not like they’re legislating.

    • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Even better, since they receive more federal money than they give, we’d be left with excess money that can be used for states that actually give a damn about their people.

      • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Texas might be the one red state that’s not true for. They make a lot of money, it helps that they have oil.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          But you forget that they only make that money as part of the US. If they were their own country they would have to replicate a lot of government institutions, with little experience or help from other countries.

          It would be very expensive to put an embassy in every country around the world, or negotiate trade agreements. The UK is fucked after leaving the EU and they already had all the government infrastructure and relationships set up.

          Texas is not a signatory of NAFTA, so they would literally be left out of North American trade. They’d end up at the level of Mexico in 20 years due to brain drain.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    When I hear shit like this, it makes me think Sherman didn’t go far enough. He should’ve eradicated the South and given the land to the union. Slaveowners should’ve been arrested and stripped of their property rights. Southern states should’ve been dissolved and their governments reconstituted by the union.

    The union should’ve crushed the south and occupied it like the US occupied Nazi Germany post-WWII.

    • Wolf_359@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      He would just call them Democrats.

      The parties did a flip flop. Democrats used to be the conservative party.

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Lincoln would not recognize the current republican party as his own. He’d call them pretenders and go back to chopping trees in the woods.

  • Doubletwist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    At this point I think Biden needs to just call their bluff. He should come back with, “Okay, here’s all the plans we’ve drawn up to go into effect as soon as you ratify your secession.”

    Then present the plans that include cessation of all federal subsidies to all public and private Texas entities, removal of all US military personnel and equipment, removal of all other federal agencies and personal (eg. Federal Border Patrol, Park rangers, IRS), removal of the Federal reserve in Dallas, the construction of border walls around the state in NM, OK, AR, and LA asking with placement of the removed border patrol there, and so on.

    Let them stew for a bit and chew on just how utterly fucked this state (yeah I live in TX, and early awaiting the day we can leave) would be if they really did successfully secede.

    • mrcleanup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      If they really did secede, I think it’s a bit presumptuous to assume you would still have travel rights in the US. Better get out before it happens.

      • Mnemnosyne@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m vaguely curious, though not enough to go look it up, how issues of citizenship have been handled in other peaceful separations, like that of Czechoslovakia.

        The answer I would find most reasonable, though not necessarily most likely, is to give everyone a certain amount of time to declare which citizenship they choose to retain.

        • Doubletwist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Per Wikipedia.

          • Czechoslovakia

          On January 1, 1993, all Czechoslovak citizens automatically became citizens either of the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic, based on their previous citizenship, permanent residence address, birthplace, family ties, job and other criteria. Additionally, people had one year’s time to claim the other citizenship under certain conditions.

          I think things were a LOT uglier in the breakup of Yugoslavia, as well as the partition of India and Pakistan.

          So it could go either way.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Well that’s because Yugoslavia was an administrative hodgepodge of actual countries. Oh wait that’s not good Texas is home to several district cultural and regional identities. Okay but at least it’s not a religious thing right?

            Fuck.

      • Doubletwist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Like everything else, it’s a risk trade-off calculation. On the one hand, I’d love to leave now, but If we leave before 2029, it could cost us potentially $1-3million in teacher retirement pension. (spread across 20-30+ years as my wife can retire quite early because she started so young)

        So one must balance the risk of Texas really seceding vs the financial cost of leaving early.

        At this stage, while it’s a ‘fun’ (I use that term very loosely) thought experiment, I think the likelihood of Texas actually seceding is pretty low. If at some point it starts to look like it’s actually likely, then we’ll reevaluate if it makes sense to let go of that much money.

        • mrcleanup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Doesn’t mean they won’t try. Last time someone tried, the civil war happened. Lack of success doesn’t mean lack of associated problems or consequences. The real questions would be how far would they get and how bad would it get. Sure, there’s a good chance they would never actually try, but the chances they will aren’t zero.

  • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Say they’re in rebellion, pull funding, personnel, and representation, watch them collapse.

  • runswithjedi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    This is some insane logic. Wouldn’t this work both ways? Couldn’t the US say “sorry Texas, you seceded so your electoral college votes don’t count.”

    • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      “Not like that! I want all of the privilege but none of the responsibility. Why are you being so unreasonable?!”

      • Republicans
      • WashedOver@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Reminds me of Quebec. They wanted to separate from Canada but wanted to still use Canadian money and still have access to national Canadian programs.

        It’s not a pick and choose situation as much as you like it. You’re either in the country and a part of it, or you’re not.

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          What got me was wanting to be able to continue to have Canadian Passports.

          A lot of these movements are dominated be people that have a lot of pride in their region (which is fine) but don’t have a good grasp on international affairs to the point that they don’t actually understand what it means to be a country.

        • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          They’d still be able to use Canadian money. There are eleven countries right now that use US currency as their official currency. The Canadian federal programs are right out, though.

        • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Honestly, it’s the story of conservatives literally everywhere.

          Conservatives in UK: We want all of the benefits of being in the EU but not pay as much into it as those other countries, use our own money.

          EU: SIGH Fine!

          (Later)

          Conservatives in UK: We want out! We can’t stand the fact that non-white people can enter our country whenever they like. And we don’t want refuges.

          EU: Fine!

          (Later, after brexit)

          Conservatives: why can’t we just travel to Europe like we used to?

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Weird, the right wing keeps trying to lie and imply that KKK/Confederates somehow have something to do with today’s Democratic Party and not the conservative movement…

    Huh.