CapeXit 2

Poll is for all in South Africa -

  • Do you believe W/Cape secession from the Republic is feasible ?

    Votes: 28 34.1%

  • Would you support a bid for W/Cape to secede from the Republic ?

    Votes: 33 40.2%

  • In the event of secession being successful, would you consider migrating to W/Cape ?

    Votes: 23 28.0%

  • In the event of secession being successful, would you consider migrating out of W/Cape ?

    Votes: 3 3.7%

  • Would you support other provinces bids for secession ?

    Votes: 20 24.4%

  • I disagree to all questions

    Votes: 35 42.7%

  • Would you support a "Swiss Canton" style of governance for the Republic ?

    Votes: 24 29.3%
  • Total voters
    82
Status
Not open for further replies.
images
 
lexity said:
Was it you that had my challenge to your anti-libertarian decree memory-holed, Grant?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

You do know he wasn't (deadly) serious in the OP, right?.. he's been involved with the last one all along.


This thread... sheesh
Seriously, not too interested. Until Phil catches a wake-up
 
Brian_G said:
:rolleyes:

You do know he wasn't (deadly) serious in the OP, right?.. he's been involved with the last one all along.


This thread... sheesh
Seriously, not too interested. Until Phil catches a wake-up
Click to expand...

If it hasn't happened yet, then don't hold your breath, that would be a terminal exercise.
 
lexity said:
Was it you that had my challenge to your anti-libertarian decree memory-holed, Grant?
Click to expand...
what challenge ?

are you trying to ask (in a convoluted manner), if i reported some post of yours ?

**in the event of your assuming I reported some post of yours, allow me to express my disappointment.
by now, you should have come to realise i prefer entering into battle on open ground, not hiding behind a proxy

***apropos the so-called "anti libertarian decree".
there was no decree issued - it was a reminder this thread is for the purpose of discussing w/c secession - not libertarian philosophy - as the previous thread had devolved into
 
Last edited:
So it sounds like whoever had it removed did so before grant could even read it.

Perhaps as an attempt to spare him the embarrassment.

Was it you who had it memory-holed, Brian_G?

Be honest.....
 
Hmmm.... who or what could have occasioned the removal of the challenge.

Very odd.

The post went something like this...

[in reply to the opening post]:

You're just salty that your application for e-residence in a budding libertarian-ordered nation was rejected.

(and containing a version of the following challenge to Grant... not word for word because it's been deleted):

[

If there is ever a short-hand that the libertarian philosophy can be summed up by it is the "Non-Aggression Principle" aka the NAP.

It means only force used in defense and voluntarily contracting parties is legitimate. Otherwise its aggression.

This is pretty much the first thing people interested in libertariansim will learn about it. That, and the fact it had its original name - 'Liberalism' - stolen by Pinko Progresives aka Commie-leaning Social Democrats in the early 20th century. The NAP is one of the things libertarians of all stripes know can be traced to the movement's founder Murry Rothbard.

So, since when is being anti-aggression a bad thing? Perhaps' Vrotppel's point, about who gets to make the decision about whether Cape secession will be peaceful or not, applies i.e. the rest of SA.

All we're doing is discussing the use of a referendum to guage the people's current preference for independence? Yet here you are, Grant, stipulating that I - and anyone else opposed to aggression who wants to argue their case - is forbidden from making the case on this thread.

Tell you what, let's both put our money where our mouths are. Let's have someone create 2 threads: one titled 'pro-NAP-capexit' and the other titled 'anti-NAP-capexit', with both sharing equal visibility.

That way we'll see which one people prefer to contribute to, and which one they're happier to see the end of.

If the latter is the anti-NAP-capexit thread, then so be it, I will take that on the chin and leave you to the other thread entirely i.e. I will not post again. This thread can be merged into the 'anti-NAP-capexit' thread.

So, someone set it up, please. Let's do it.

]
Click to expand...
@Grant
 
Last edited:
Now don't all start using the P-word, just 'cos we've discovered it works...
 
lexity said:
Cray asked for examples of successful secessions(as opposed to successions) on the back of a referendum.

I'm not sure to what extent prior polling took place but obviously enough people felt strongly enough to overthrow an oppressive British military force.

They succeeded in seceding, clearly.
Click to expand...

No, not clear at all.

They were a colony, not a geographical part of England. A continent away. They did not have the same rights as English citizens, which is one of the reasons they revolted. Yes - a revolt, not a secession.

That's why it's called the American Revolution. Not the American secession.

By the way, do you really call a secession that requires a war (and international support), successful?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X