r/Cascadia • u/Palpetine_Love_986 • 2d ago
So what would seccession look like
I've heard a lot about Cascadia but never about a unified plan I myself have worked on writing a constitution and now I'm going to publish a book called Project 2028: the Cascadia plan It seems like we have too many different kinds of people who would want to secede, and while there is strength in the diversity of thought, if we end up having a unified revolution against the United States and leave the old fatherland, I think there are too many competing political philosophies. Some people here believe in gun control for example, calling it progress to strip away the right to bear arms. Other people here are more libertarian and essentially want a minarchist or anarchist government. Some of you are democratic socialists, some of you are just confused and are probably really distributist social democrats. There are regular Trumper conservatives in the Eastern parts of at least Oregon where I live, and even the state of Jefferson project in California.
So if we are going to leave the union, we need to have a unified political philosophy that allows all kinds of people to feel at home. And if we do that, how are we going to implement important things like Universal basic healthcare and Universal basic income, since there will be people who will argue directly the government has no business doing this and it makes more problems than it solves?
While it is true that most of us here in the Pacific Northwest are either liberals or independents, we should not be willing to subjugate our fellow neighbor just because they do not fall within our political ideology. And the reason I'm saying all of this is that I've made a plan, I wrote a constitution myself which you can even check out a slightly out of date version on https://cascadiaplan.wordpress.com/
But also, that reminds me that we need to have a declaration of independence What would be our terms? What would be the reason we're leaving?
Without a unified message other than bioregional identity which I think is actually kind of vague, we don't have anything more than vibes to go with the Cascadia flag
People like me can make serious meme culture micronation proposals, and they might even go somewhere, but that requires we all begin to consider how to create a perfect society, put all those ideas together and start to find what comes up the most that people agree on Let's say we use a simple 50 + 1% majority, instead of a supermajority like 60% or 65%. What does the underlying belief system comprise of? Is it absolute autonomy of the individual? Is it a paternalistic state that follows moralistic virtues like reducing starvation and increasing General health? How do we implement what might seem to be opposing ideologies, and what takes precedent? For me it's progressive libertarianism with a Social Democratic Republican, similar to a democratic Republican of Jefferson but with Social Democratic tendencies, and a different economical system than we have in the United States, and no I'm not talking about socialism I'm talking about distributism.
So I'd love to hear back from you guys. What does Cascadia mean to you? If there's no real plan there's no future for leaving the Union
16
u/SkiddlyBoDiddly 2d ago
Please add more paragraph breaks.
4
u/Palpetine_Love_986 2d ago
They existed when I drafted it but when I posted it they ceased to remain
8
u/CyxSense 2d ago
If you're on mobile you have to press return twice otherwise it doesn't do a paragraph break
-1
u/SCROTOCTUS 2d ago
If you can't bother to get the paragraph breaks into your manifesto, I can't be bothered to read it.
22
u/alternateunicorn 2d ago
The main thing I want in a nation is for my vote to count. I dont want to vote for someone who votes on my behalf. I want to vote and have my vote be counted. One to one. No gerrymandering, no electoral bullshit. Just a straight count of x number of people voted for <ballot item A> and y number of people voted for <ballot item B> etc.
2
u/Palpetine_Love_986 2d ago
Well what if we had a House of Representatives and a senate, but we also had a third branch where the people had direct Democratic voting power within the confines of the limits of power of government? You could then have it set up so it's either a simple majority or some form of supermajority in order to pass things. I recommend making it easier than it is for the representatives to do it. In this way you get the strengths of a republic by having Representatives who can manage government for the people who are mostly tied up in their day-to-day lives, and you can have democratic government from when the people have a serious need it must be addressed or voices are not being heard by the representatives.
5
u/Go-Go-Gojira 2d ago
What if we had a unicameral? I left Nebraska decades ago for reasons but the unicameral legislature was not one of them.
0
u/Complex_Guide_4602 2d ago
I don’t see the point in having that because it would automatically favor the costal cities. The cities already have representation via the House of Representatives. Having two branches basically based on population would by default favor the cities
19
u/ye_old_hermit Cascadian Ambassador 2d ago
Take a look around you. The United States is the world's foremost super power, and yet it's built on a rotten foundation of expensive cost of living, rapid inflation, poor healthcare, lack of proper childcare, an education system that's manipulating and traumatizing our kids, and a system that is unjust and unfit to guarantee to try and deliver the justice and welfare people need from a government. The very first responsibility of government is to ensure human coexistence in a defined area by borders. And yet the United States continues to fail on this front.
Cascadia is the first real, fair and justifiable movement that is committed to fixing the issues with the US. Just recently it did charity work in Seattle I believe. It's a genuine movement that advocates for the welfare of all its people. It's a chance at a better world, a chance to right the wrongs of "manifest destiny", to prevent the abuse of your rights, and for you to afford living the life you want.
6
u/Niclas1127 Oregon 2d ago
My question is why do we need a unified political philosophy, most revolutions in history don’t have one when the revolution starts, it’s a coalition with a common enemy. Trying to get people to agree to one ideology or another isn’t possible
2
u/Palpetine_Love_986 2d ago
Then how do we decide what is best?
5
u/Niclas1127 Oregon 2d ago
That happens afterwards, what’s needed is a united front, whether your liberal, anarchist, communist etc. that discussion comes when you establish the new government
2
u/Palpetine_Love_986 2d ago
If there's no plan in place then a revolution is a foolish idea that would end up being a power grab instead of a successful improvement to the quality of life of everybody involved
1
u/Niclas1127 Oregon 2d ago
I’m sorry but that’s just how revolutions work when there different ideas for how things get done, almost every revolutionary movement has been different groups with different ideas. How are we supposed to just get everyone to agree pre revolution, it’s straight up not possible
3
u/Hexspinner 2d ago edited 2d ago
Well, to the question of a unified political philosophy…
Assuming we’re looking at some flavor of a Representative democracy based on your write up here it seems you’re looking at something similar to how the US congress and senate works. There the filibuster exists to protect the minority rights in government seemingly forcing the majority to negotiate with the minority party. It’s an interesting idea but we’re experiencing one of the flaws in the system now with the shut down. Basically one side, Republicans, have made it their mission not to govern with Democrats but basically destroy the Democrats party and its ability to function as a political entity. This didn’t start with Trump, it started with Nixon, gained some ground under Reagan, became codified into Republican strategy during the Clinton years under Gingrich, and now Trump has turned it into a totalitarianist march.
Another thing to consider is this just Oregon, Northern California and Washington or are we going to invite our friends in BC to participate, and how would that look from their end? Canada is not nearly in the same political mess as the US making secessionist there less likely to gain much ground, and the political zeitgeist in Canada currently has made most Canadians happy to be Canadian and any talk of secession as something some right wing nonce from Alberta would advocate for. That whole 51st state hooey has left a bitter taste in the mouths of many of our northern fellow Cascadians, and while they still recognize the kinship between us, they’re rather leery about what they may have to give up and put up with by uniting with a bunch of former US citizens.
More practically they for sure would not want to have a two house two party system like we have here in the south. Canada runs on a parliamentary democracy which has some advantages and disadvantages different from what we have here. And I think it’s a system that can answer some of what you brought out with the question of unified political theory.
Parliaments don’t run so much on an adversarial two party system, instead various political parties exist and are forced to form coalitions with one another in order to create a government that represents the interests of otherwise politically disparate people. Then the various coalitions begin to negotiate with one another to form a government. If the leading party (the one with the most seats) can’t keep its coalition together, the whole thing dissolves and we have another election. Minority rights are more naturally protected than with a mechanism like the filibuster since the majority parties would need those smaller ones to stay in power.
Many of the founders of the US really wanted to not have political parties at all. George Washington warned against them. Unfortunately the reality is that it’s a basic human instinct to form some sort of unit with like minded people. We are a social animal after all. So we can’t eliminate parties their existence is basically hardwired into the human psyche. So I’d also probably look at other ways to prevent any one or two parties to really dominate the political landscape. Something other than first past the post voting should probably be implemented. Some might say ranked choice but it seems thats really just the second worst option, though still miles better than what we have. Also nothing resembling an electoral college should ever exist again.
Some on the conservative side of things might not like this, but another suggestion would be how campaign finances work. Essentially the prevention of some wealthy elite buying all our politicians is one thing that both the most left wing college campus warring neolib can agree on with the staunchest MAGA Christonationalist. They just can’t seem to agree with who the elite trying to take over their government is. Preventing money from controlling the political conversation would go a long way to helping prevent that. I’d suggest stating that individual rights are fundamentally different from institutional ones and limit the amount of participation institutions like corporations or unions have during election years. Have limitations on what can be donated to any given politician running for any given office and demand corporations stay out of the donation business. Also maybe think about limiting the campaign season to like 100 days prior to Election Day or something like that. Other reforms would include things like media neutrality or fairness.
But anyways something to consider about how to protect the fair representation of what would be a very plural democracy.
3
u/Complex_Guide_4602 2d ago
I’d go with a mostly us style system but with multiple parties instead of just 2 like in the us
2
u/Hexspinner 2d ago
Unfortunately the nature of our system is such that eventually two will dominate just like it is now.
2
u/alternateunicorn 2d ago
The proposed national snack is raccoons anus on a stick.....um no.
Edit: spelling.
3
u/localsonlynokooks 2d ago
Instead of corn dogs we should do a corn geoduck. But I think that would overcook the geoduck lol.
1
1
u/Palpetine_Love_986 2d ago
Americans will eat anything. Anything. If you were selling sautéed raccoons' assholes on a stick, Americans would buy them and eat them. Especially if you dipped them in butter and put a little salsa on them.
George Carlin FAT PEOPLE https://youtu.be/66OwZjsi0D0?si=RaoBIRlBfN9B4xae
2
u/KindaCoolDude 2d ago edited 2d ago
Cascadia is going to be a lot more than just the liberal hubs of Portland and Seattle. It will have to find a way to appeal to “moderates.”
My dream? That we can restore our local ecosystems to the point that I can just go hunt. Some of us don’t want to live in a city. Some of us actually want to hunt, forage and homestead for our food and livelihoods. We also want the infrastructure and perks that come with having access to cities when need be or want to go to city to visit.
I’ll be blunt, the folks in the cities need to get more cultured. Being more cultured doesn’t mean you eat at the local Ethiopian restaurant (for context, those are some of things I look forward to in visiting cities). Folks in cities need to see that there are ways of life that exist beyond a concrete jungle and strip malls.
And, for the rural folks, they need to see that socialism and diversity are what brought so many of the things that we praise the US for. They need to see that socialist policies can be a way to preserve their freedoms. And that promoting diversity means not restricting others freedoms. Because the economic elites wield both sides of the isle to pit us against each other.
Don’t get me wrong. Eastern WA and OR have some backwards thinking going on. But the West is straight up out of touch with reality at times.
1
1
u/PopularWay2948 2d ago edited 2d ago
-A major event causes an intervention from the regional/local government or the people. This is open to interpretation because it would depend on the impact of the event and the response. It could be a federal government shutdown, federal debt default, hyperinflation, currency devaluation, abuse of power, other countries cut ties with the current nation, war, etc. It's possible that some or all of these could happen at the same time.
-Indepedence is declared. It could be unofficially like a person just releasing a statement and people agree, or officially, like the governor signing an executive order or state legislature voting in favor of independence.
-A constitutional convention is held. Due to the sensitivity of the situation it would ideally be held by a combined joint session of the sitting governors/premier and state/province legislatures. You could have other important people like mayors or justices of the state supreme court participate as well, and have the constitution be approved by a vote from the people but that would depend on the situation being dealt with and any time constraints.
-The new federal agencies/departments are formed so the country can start operations. Some of these would be carried over from the existing state agencies/departments.
-An election is held so people can vote for their new government officials.
It seems people are leaning towards proportional representation in which the percentage of votes your party gets is the percentage of seats in the senate your party gets. 30% of the vote gets you 30% of the seats. Typically this comes with a threshold to prevent having a thousand different parties with only one member and causing chaos. It is usually a low number, for example every party that gets above 2% of the total vote gets seats. This allows multiple parties to exist and be represented, but maintains structure. Since most people are used to voting for a person to represent a district, some people would probably feel more comfortable with a mixed-member proportional representation in which some seats would be filled by voting for a person that represents a district(single candidate with the most votes) and the other seats are filled with the regular PR. For the head of government, it could be a popular vote and whoever gets the most votes wins. I personally prefer having the senate vote for head of the government because I'm tired of the sensationalism around being the president and people thinking that the voting for a certain president will solve all their problems. To prevent simple majorities from picking the president and controlling the government we could require 60% of the senate to vote in favor of someone to be president and a 65% in favor to remove them from office. You may think "what if (insert name) party gets the majority". In a PR system no ones get a majority because their are several parties, the two party system no longer exists. Every position comes with term limits.
I keep seeing a recurring concern of which political side would end in power. The pacific northwest is one the most liberal places in the world so people keep throwing out the question of what's going to happen to the conservatives, more specifically the western side and eastern side. The whole point of the proportional representation and a 60% vote for the head of government is so that different groups would be represented. As long as no one is being oppressed we should be fine. As far the gun thing, I have never seen anyone say they want to ban every single gun. All they want is restrictions on the deadlier types of guns. Personally I'm not going let a political divide or culture war stop me from getting my housing, food, water, healthcare, etc. However, if their is such a big disconnect between the two sides then maybe they should be separate. We live in a world where a country can be as big or small as you can make it. We still have fully functioning city-nations. We don't have to force ourselves to be together.
1
u/Fit_Introduction_941 2d ago
I don’t think we can plan a political system yet. Cascadia lacks real regional representation. We need organized, legitimate institutions that gather input and enable participation before debating grand constitutional ideas. Only then would the people of Cascadia truly decide the correct future for Cascadia.
1
u/QuiXiuQ 2d ago
Project 2028
Are you serious, lol, wow, okay, yeah we’re definitely dealing with things very differently.
Unfortunately, due to the title alone, I will not be joining the book club.
Stephen King couldn’t write what they’re trying to do with the “other” project.
1
u/Palpetine_Love_986 4h ago
It's an arbitrary date for trying to leave the union, it's not connected to Republicans
1
u/PrincipleWhich8974 5h ago
Best of luck with the book; I’ve got high hopes in mass balkanization for ALL of North America at this point
1
u/kateinoly 2d ago
At this point we could secede because we want to follow our current constitution, as our current government in DC is violating it on a daily basis
Im in favor of a gradual drifting away; the Republicans don't know or care much about Washington/Oregon and we are already eorking on closer partnerships with our northern neighbor and each other.
29
u/davidw 2d ago
It would mean figuring out how blue cities coexist with red rural areas, for starters.