I never really understood, but now that that house bill passed that may end up blocking AI regulation from individual States. I get it. I don’t like knowing that even if everyone in my state wanted to stop companies from using AI for hiring decisions, we couldn’t.
Texans, I feel you.
Edit: I’m learning a lot about Texas in this thread. Thanks for all the context folks.
Man this is really getting into the weeds. I don’t have those histories in my head well enough to talk about specifics like that. (Though I do appreciate all that you wrote. It is interesting to read.)
Me either.
I’m pretty sure the main focus is just about the abstract idea of a group wanting to leave a larger group.
Secession is anarchist in the sense that it rejects and fractures a dominant power in favor of one that better represents folks. So not full anarchist, but definitely more in that anarchist than restricting that ability.
Secession is a tool. Of course there are going to be bad examples, but that doesn’t mean it’s never justified and never a good way forward.
What if you had just been annexed? Not allowed to try and leave?
When has this actually happened?
Are you describing a country where a significant powerful plurality embraced annexation (a la Texas under Polk or Hawaii under the The United Fruit Company).
Or one that’s been liberated after a terrible Continental war, a la the Eastern European states after WW2?
Because these are very different situations.
But more importantly, would Hawaii benefit somehow if the island’s residents staged an armed insurrection? Secession does nothing to fix the underlying economic problems of the island. It doesn’t even address the popular impulses of the proletariat.
You’re putting the cart before the horse.