Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Texas. It’s a Whole Other Country
I promised the Texans of Ricochet a post just for them. Others may participate, of course, because we all have to decide what our policy toward the Sovereign and Independent Republic of Texas will be. Because today on Ricochet, Texas seceded.
Before deciding whether that’s good or bad, I figured I’d ask Ricochet’s Texans to explain the details. I myself don’t know exactly how it happened, but I assume it went something like this: The rest of the Still-United States (SUS) couldn’t be bothered. (I doubt anyone’s thinking enough about history these days to have a strong emotion when they consider things that sound like “the South seceding.” So the SUS response was, “Whatever,” and obviously the rest of the world said, “Whatever,” too. Probably a lot of it said, “Great! Divide and conquer.” Anyway, it all went fine.)
Texans, I’ve visited your fine country more than a few times–back when it was mine, too–and frankly, I loved what I saw. As far as I’m concerned, the Sovereign and Independent Republic of Texas now has complete, total, and unencumbered political, cultural, and economic independence. Welcome to the United Nations! (I assume you want to be in the General Assembly, at least, for prestige purposes?) Anyway, congratulations. You’re the 14th largest economy in the world by GDP. You’re oil rich.
And you’re on your own.
Of course, as a foreign policy analyst, I have to think of Texas in a slightly different way. So I want to know all about you. Here are my questions for the Texans among us. If anyone else is curious, of course, jump in with your own.
1) Texans, I’d love to know about your political institutions. How are they similar or dissimilar to those of your neighbor to the north? Would I be correct in assuming it’s the country with the most cultural influence on you? Yours have got to be different in some really important ways, though, or no point in being independent. I assume you’ll also be influenced by your neighbor to the south. Any parts of this you’d want? Have you modeled your institutions on some other country with a better system of governance? Which? I don’t want to offend you, so tell me if you have a president, a prime minister, a congress, a parliament, proportional representation, first-past-the-post, D’Hondt system–whatever it is, of course I respect it, but I need to know, it’s my job. You’re now a foreign country; that means I have to study you and your political system. You don’t have to tell me everything, but help me out: Wikipedia’s out of date. Says you’re part of the United States. That’s why you shouldn’t believe everything you read on Wikipedia.
2) Are you a threat to the SUS or friendly? I figure you’re friendly, kind of like Canada: “No, really, we’re a sovereign nation. We’re Americans too, but we’re not the United States,” and everyone basically laughs and says, “That’s cute, Canada.” But I don’t want to get that wrong. Finding out you’re not friendly would be plenty embarrassing for a foreign policy analyst. So give me a hint: What’s your defence policy, basically? I’m sure you’ve thought through the problem of some idiot in the SUS waking up one day and deciding he wants to do something ridiculous like “save the Union.” I can’t imagine it in this day and age, but sovereign states have to worry about worst-case scenarios. And you’re oil-rich. So if you’re not thinking, “Someone’s going to try to invade us,” you’d be a bit loopy. Texas is anything but loopy. The Texas Department of Defense (or whatever you call it, you tell me–I want to use the right terminology) is no doubt planning for worst-case scenarios. Or in the case of an oil-rich country, “likely scenarios.”
3) Should I worry about a miscalculation that leads to war between the SUS and Texas? Do you have a plan for signalling to the SUS that they’d best not invade you–but not signalling it so hard that things gets out of hand and you get invaded? (I think the SUS would win, as things stand now.) In my professional opinion, it probably won’t happen, so you probably don’t need nuclear weapons. But you do need a plan: Independent, sovereign nations need long-term plans, especially with neighbors like yours. You’ve got a superpower or at least a regional hegemon to the north and lots of oil. Sounds to me like you don’t trust the SUS one bit. So what’s the plan?
3) What’s your immigration policy? If I want Texas citizenship, what do I have to do to get it? I don’t have Texas ancestry, alas. Do I have any kind of advantage if I have SUS ancestry? Are some SUS states better than others, in that regard?
4) Would I be allowed to work in Texas as a legal resident of some kind and keep my SUS citizenship? If so, would I face a lot of prejudice against Americans? Would I be dealing with a lot of unpleasant questions and suspicions about my dual loyalty? (Question for my fellow Americans in the SUS–would I get that from you?) Suppose you say I can’t keep my SUS passport if I want a Texas one. Say I decide I want a Texas passport, immigrate legally, do everything I need to get Texas citizenship, and become a Texan. Would other Americans think I was a traitor? What about non-Americans: If you’re visiting the formerly United States, do you want to get a visa both for the SUS and Texas? If it’s too much of a hassle to get both, which would you choose?
5) Texans, what’s your immigration policy toward Mexico? Toward other countries? How about trade policy? And this one’s super-important: What’s your currency? Do you have your own or are you still using the dollar? It’s tricky to be totally sovereign without your own currency–just ask the EU. Though not impossible–just ask France. But to do it you need to do a lot of make-believe and be highly motivated to pretend you’re independent and be independent and still kind of not be, too. It gets messy.
6) How about the tax regime–if I worked there and paid SUS taxes, would I get slammed with Texas taxes, too?
7) Americans, how do we feel about Texans who want to come to the SUS? Do we give them priority, because they used to be Americans? Or make them stand in line like everyone else? Texans, do you think you’ll want to visit America for any reason? Have you worked out this problem properly? Getting an H1B visa to work in the SUS is no joke. Have you negotiated some kind of visa-free travel regime? Problem with that is the moment the SUS gets worried that you may have a problem controlling your borders–well, fair or unfair, they’re going to stick you with the problem. I figure even one terrorist slips through the Mexican border and gets through Texas to Albuquerque–no less New York–“visa-free travel for Texans” is going to sound insane to American voters.
8) What’s your foreign policy, generally? Are you in NATO? I figure not. I don’t see Texas signing up for defending countries they do not want to defend. Or admitting that maybe they’d need the SUS to defend them if they got themselves in big trouble. So I’m guessing you’re not in NATO. Would I be right?
9) What other parts of the established sovereign state system are you aiming for? Are you aiming high? I think you should, you’re Texas–you want to be a star performer in that system, not a lone star performer. So you want a seat on the Security Council. (I’m assuming you’re definitely not interested in the UNESCO part of the UN. Don’t blame you.) Problem with that is you basically do have to nuke up to get there. I’m just not sure the SUS is going to be comfortable with that. It means you didn’t sign the NPT. So I figure that’s causing a lot of headaches in Washington. “Surgical strikes on Texas” will not sound right–at all–to anyone in the SUS, so I bet you’re right to think they’d never stop you. Just curious how it all works. Getting nuked up comes with its own hassles. You don’t have access to a lot of the Triad anymore, so if you want the whole shebang, you’re going to have to work like stink. To do it fast, you’d probably have to be on the phone with North Korea. You don’t want to get your hands that dirty or be one of those countries the Still-United States has to go all “pariah state” about. You could do it on your own, but it definitely won’t be overnight.
9) Next thing, obviously (you’re Texas) is OPEC. Are you a moderate in OPEC pricing policy, or will the SUS have to do some serious arm-twisting? Just curious.
10) You’re doing great on warm-water ports. The SUS has plenty, so of course it won’t get all fussy about yours. Enough to go around for everyone. I don’t foresee any spats about that. Just wondering which part of the Navy–if any–you kept. I assume some negotiations happened (don’t know the details, you tell me) and you kept some of it. I’m thinking you probably got to keep the Coast Guard–yours fair and square–but SUS taxpayers would have been highly unamused if you tried to make off with the expensive stuff. Lackland? Probably the SUS just flew the important stuff out (it flies, after all, that’s the point) and let you complain all you like. So I just can’t see how you kept the really expensive parts of the SUS military. You don’t want to be a small, oil-rich country without that. You could rebuild a lot of it on your own–I mean, obviously, you’ve got a few divisions of Lockheed-Martin and Boeing and Raytheon and etc. But once you go totally sovereign, you have to worry about things like whether they people working there are loyal. Total bureaucracy nightmare–background checks, security clearances. I’ll bet tons of the people who work there would have a serious dual-loyalty problem.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally pro-Texas. I love Texas. I figure if you love something, you set it free, if it comes back, it’s yours, if it doesn’t, it never was. (Either that or I’d be as berserk about the Constitution as that madman Lincoln.) But here on Ricochet, we are mature. So mature that we can even discuss this without a hint of incivility, no less a civil war.
Texas, you are free.
I’m just curious. How?
Published in General
Another question: since I was born on a TX military base, formerly run by the SUS, do I receive a share of the oil revenues? Do I need to repatriate myself before being eligible? If I currently reside in a socialist republic (MN), will you accept me as a political refugee?
I’m not a Texian but it must be about slavery (IRS). Abolish slavery(IRS) and save the Union.
It appears that the outcome from an independent Texas–as tempting as this idea might be–this has already been a topic of speculation.
(Yes Claire, this is unresponsive to all of your excellent questions, but I couldn’t resist.)
What about those of us Texans who migrated to other states for work, leaving extended family behind? (I hope we can return, if need be.)
What sort of state-to-state relations will Texas foster? Seeing as how Tennesseans and Texans have been working together since the Alamo, I’d like to think Texas would cut us some slack.
If we could get Arkansas on board, would Texas want to work out a Arkansas/Tennessee Purchase and expand Texas into the Southeast?
I will restate my position on Texas secession:
Texas tried secession in 1861 and it didn’t work out none to good. Big thing about Texas is that Texans learn from failure. Next time ’round Texas won’t secede. Rather they will lead the liberation of the slave (blue) states.
Why?
‘Cause secession creates more problems than it solves. Like a flood of illegal immigrants. Nah. Not from Mexico. Despite what you hear Texas has always been cool with that, so long as they come to work, and follow the laws. (Problem now is the Federal Government is trying to get us to keep the lawless and lazy.) Rather, I am talking about those from the eastern, northern, and western borders who are gonna come flooding over from the pathetic wreck of what is left of the USA if Texas leaves.
So, it’s better to fix the problems in the rest of the US than to go it alone. Not that Texas cannot be pushed into secession if the rest of the US insists, but I think we would rather avoid it.
Seawriter
If Texas manages to abolish death or taxes, I’ll be more than pleasantly surprised. I’m still thinking in terms of goals like “lower taxes and longer life expectancy.”
If Texas can conquer taxes, they can conquer death. Let’s hear from the Texans, though. Can you do it?
So, you’re telling me Tennessee would be welcome. Cool.
Seems like common sense to me. I figure even in a best-case scenario, that’s what you’d get–a flood of illegal immigrants from the SUS. You could build a fence around it, but it seems to me everything you could do to keep them out would also function as a physical barrier to trade with the SUS.
A US-Free Texas border would be about 2,800 kms long.
The current US-Mexico border is only about 2,400 kms long.
Would a Free Texas be capable of policing such a long border?
Independent Texas would never work. Once independent Texans would find themselves having no currency, They would be cut of from numerous popular federal programs like Social Security and Medicare. So their new government would have to scramble to implement something to replace them. Raising the funds and creating the bureaucracy to do it will crate a real mess. They would have no Army, Navy, or Air Force since I can’t imagine why the SUS would let them keep any of the equipment since none of it was payed for by Texas. Also While Texas is now home to numerous companies I think many would flee the state if talk of secession seemed serious and likely, that is what happened with many Canadian Companies in Quebec. Texas would also see food prices rise until they agreed to some sort of trade deal with the SUS, but really Texas would always be in a disadvantage in any negotiations, since Texas would need the SUS more. They would also find themselves a ripe target for Mexican Nationalism and since it isn’t clear they would be part of any alliance they would be very vulnerable.
The point is Texas would have to militarize and socialize very fast. I could see them militarizing easily enough, but socializing? Oh man, that would be the height of irony. But you have to imagine that any government in Texas that led it to independence would be very nationalistic and economically interventionist as they would need to take control of Texas’ resources and people to push their Great Texas agenda. They will nationalize the Oil Industry to gain an easy spigot of money, they will create a vast bureaucracy to doll out Oil benefits to keep social unrest down and to deflate the Pro SUS arguments for reunification. Really though the budgetary strain would mean that while they probably could form a soil Self Defense force independent Texas would be about as competent at projecting power as Poland. Their main focus would be on defending themselves against Mexico. If on the other hand they obtain NATO membership they would probably become another one of the great mooching nations favoring social welfare spending over military spending due to the SUS aegis.
Really independent Texas would become a a half rate petro-nation circling the drain of socialism. They are too big and heterogenious to be Norway or Kuwait so really they would just at best become a Southern Canada, but more likely they will become a kind of not as crappy Mexico.
And exactly where did I suggest abolishing taxes? I like Seawriter’s extended discussion of this. Slavery in the modern sense is the level to which an individual’s property (wealth) is taken by the state. Abolishing the IRS will allow a significant reduction in this level and foster the liberation of the blue states.
Does this mean the Eagles won’t play the Cowboys twice a year? I wouldn’t like that. Those Sundays are two of my most intense days of the year.
Especially this year, since we stole the Cowboys’ best player, DeMarco Murray. Oh man, am I looking forward to those games!
I mean, come on, you gotta consider these things when it comes to political issues.
First, the phrase is “whole nother country.” It rolls off the tongue better. Like any independent nation, we practice an independent vocabulary.
Second, peaceful secession isn’t possible, regardless of what any law or constitution proposes. No political leadership would watch an important and sizable chunk of its territory walk away without a fight. That said, Texans do comprise a good portion of the US military, so let’s suppose that they defect with the military assets they operated. Certainly, no invader would look forward to a ground war in Texas, where every grandma is holding a mare’s leg. Maybe a fear campaign focused on SUS politicians could spare everyone the hassle of war.
The fundamental political difference in Texas is that we don’t allow our legislature to meet often or for very long. They don’t even gather every year. Nobody wants busy-bodies in government, so make sure when politicians do meet they are overwhelmed with truly important work. Don’t give them time to dream of a better world.
The key to effective democracy is direct communication between citizens and representatives, joined by direct and perpetual influence over politicians (not limited to election season). For this, a tiered system of representation is necessary. I elect someone I actually know; someone I can knowledgeably trust and someone I can make miserable if betrayed. In turn, he elects someone he actually knows. She elects someone she actually knows. And so on. Citizens don’t need to directly elect people to the highest offices. We benefit more from a chain of trust: trust in good character and trust in good judgment.
All laws will have a sunset clause. The law automatically expires after so many years and cannot be renewed by a simple formality. Any law worth keeping is worth redrafting, debating again, perhaps updating with modern language and modern knowledge, and taking up the legislature’s purposefully limited time.
There is no state income tax now. There will be no national income tax then. Consumption taxes, as Saint John Wayne intended.
We do not want a seat on the UN Security Council. We do not even want a general membership. The UN can suck eggs. If we deem it necessary to involve ourselves in foreign affairs — by charity, by economics, or by war — we won’t be asking for international permission. If we need to discuss, coordinate, or even ally with other nations, we don’t need a permanent kumbaya hippie circle full of tinpot dictators to accomplish that.
More later, time permitting.
The USA didn’t regularly employ an independent currency for generations. As Steyn convincingly argued in reference to the EU: nation first, currency later.
We have a comprehensive social program. It’s called family. Nothing renews those old bonds like necessity.
By the way, I spent the morning working this out, looked at the news and saw that Putin’s back. Not wanting to see my own name twice on the Main feed, I put the much more important question on the Member feed. Anyone know what’s up in our new Cold War? I’ve got no idea. Russians are being told they’re about to invade the Arctic, NATO’s saying it’s shaking hands with Moldova. Texas, you’re still in NATO, and given that there’s a bit of local excitement, you can’t keep any of the military. Ever. Sorry.
I wish it were otherwise, too.
Which is now by definition the SUS. Are you planning to trade with the SUS?
That was before Texas hosted the oil capitol of the world, along with other booming industries, modern communications and transportation technologies, and a worldwide reputation as a people not to be trifled with.
We hold the SUS in warm regard. Visitors from Flyover Country are welcome. Hippies will thrown into the PIT for initiation.
As soon to be Dictator of the Republic of TEXAS, Our policy will be as follows:
1) Anyone Here illegally will have a Lone Star branded on Their forehead and thrown back over the fence.
2) If Here illegally again, any TEXAN will be allowed to shoot said Star.
In other words, Texas of 2015 is not all that different from Texas of 1861 when it comes to geopolitics.
Industry was less decisive in the 1860s than it is today, and Texas’s lack of transportation and communications infrastructure would have been more of a deterrent to an invader than a defender.
Texas was the only state not conquered by the Federal Government in the Civil War. Texas actually rolled back Northern invasions on several occasions, and it would have been difficult to actually conquer and occupy Texas even in 1865. In a real sense Texas opted to rejoin the Union. A good part of the reason for this is secession was not earth-shatteringly popular, even in 1861. Many Texans wanted to remain in the United States, to the point where there was virtually a civil war within the Civil War within the state of Texas, with the frontier counties providing armed resistance to secession.
Despite what many today believe, the South did not lose because of the North’s greater industrial capacity. That myth was marketed after the Civil War by the Lost Cause movement, to distract from the real reason the Confederacy lost. Which was, by 1863 the North had a better strategic plan than the South, and by 1864, the Union armies were superior to the Southern armies in both strategy and tactics. The Union outfought the Confederacy.
Seawriter
Worldwide? I think you need the very humbling experience of speaking to people who ask you where you’re from, and having the conversation go like this:
“I’m American.”
“Where is that?”
Yep. For real. Totally polite. No insult intended at all. But it happened in the capital city of a country of some 1.2 billion people with nuclear weapons. Repeatedly. Zero name recognition. Not in the boondocks–the capital.
I started to feel like I was winning when I got this response,
“Is it in the West?”
Good riddance to bad barbecue.
What did y’all do about Austin? I’m imagining maybe an airlift to SUS, with automatic status as refugees, streamlined immigration and special loan guarantees to facilitate relocation to hip sanctuaries in the regrettably rather damp Pacific Northwest…?
Perhaps having 97 percent of the firearms and 94 percent of the pig iron was a bit relevant. The heavy battalions usually triumph. You’ve got to wreck the railways, burn the cities, occupy the countryside and lay the crops to waste with something, right?
Ha! Like family is going to convince all those social security recipients in Texas that they shouldn’t be paid their due. The political class of Texas gave us LBJ do you really think they are going to make Libertarian Land?
Here’s an alternate reality take I ran across a while back…
http://www.bigheadpress.com/roswell
An online graphic novel! About Texicans, who founded a libertarian paradise! And dealt with external threats! Including aliens, from outer SPAAAACE! Only occasional and somewhat tasteful nudity!
And it’s interesting. Honest.
Also lets be clear on this. Texas is only large in their own minds. As an independent nation why would they command any international respect? They are far removed from most zones of contentions and they would be bordering only two nations both of which would probably work out some sort of fairly comprehensive peace and trade program. Its stable and safe security profile would make military investment a poor deal. It close proximity to the SUS basically guarantees security as the SUS would not tolerate any nation invading Independent Texas. It would go from being an influential State in an Influential nation to being an irrelevant state. Worse yet if it were to attempt to be influential it would have to more or less mirror the SUS line it certainly could not oppose its larger northern neighbor in any significant way. Texas’ top foreign policy priority would be to stay on good relations with the SUS. Really it would be about as dumb as Scotland’s attempt at independence.
Aaron, you’ve morphed into a FiCon right before our very eyes!
Would you introduce these revolutionary ideas here in Florida so I don’t have to move? I would volunteer to spread the ‘good word’ myself but I think it’s more authentic coming from a native Texan. Bring MLR along with you.
I have another idea: How about a unification of the Gulf Coast states? We could include MS, AL and even LA if Bobby Jindal promises to never leave.
I suppose it’s not possible to carve out Washington D.C. and just let it float out to sea, so we can start over again? Damn.
Damn, I’m late to the party again, as usual. For the record, I endorse everything that Aaron Miller and Jimmy Carter have said.
Now as for a few of my own thoughts in response to Claire’s post:
1.) As for political institutions, a restored Republic of Texas would keep the ones it has, with the governor becoming a president, the legislature becoming a congress, etc. The most attractive feature thereof is that our legislature meets only once every two years and its members do not collect a regular salary. That feature would remain in the restored Republic. So would our elected judiciary; hold the bastards accountable and there is no legislating from the bench as with the American federal judiciary.
As for what we might adopt from Mexico, I would choose one thing: its immigration policy, which addresses point #5. Immigration should in no way disrupt the existing demographic equilibrium of the restored Republic. Further details can be worked out once that point is adopted.
2.) We are friendly with the SUS, likely with a limited free trade agreement in place. Meaning that…
3.) War with the SUS is highly unlikely. But Texas should acquire/develop nukes of its own. We don’t want to become North America’s version of Ukraine, unable to defend our own borders.
4.) Sure, why not?
5.) See #1 above.
6.) Perhaps, but SUS taxes would be beyond our control anyway. However, perhaps an arrangement could be worked out with the free trade agreement mentioned in #2.
7.) Visa-free travel would be likely, given that it already exists with such Anglosphere nations as Canada and the U.K. But patrolling our border with Mexico – something the current Democratic and Republican parties don’t give a tinker’s damn about doing, despite the constitutional mandate to do so – would become a top priority with a restored Republic.
8.) Foreign policy: armed neutrality. No NATO or UN membership. Any alliances/partnerships would be with proximate nations in the Western Hemisphere.
9.) As for oil policy, regional arrangement/partnerships/alliances. Relationship with OPEC would be interesting, given that Venezuelan-owned CITGO has a large refinery at Corpus Christi.
10.) Texas already has a national guard (including an air national guard) so that would be a good foundation upon which to build a military. For a new Texas Navy, coastal defense would – obviously – be a top priority. Reopening the old naval base at Ingleside would be necessary. Remember that with NASA in Houston, there it also the foundation for a Republic of Texas space program. Orbital missile platforms, a space station, a mission to Mars…the possibilities are endless.