CraftBeerCommie ☭: They also had to wait for a free state to join before they could join as a slave state, right?

Gonna be a lot of dunking on this today, so as someone who wrote his dissertation on secession movements, let me point out: 1. This is not a majoritarian mvmt. Like 1861 secession in TX, it's a minority coup 2. It looks majoritarian bc of gerrymandering and disfranchisement (1/2)

Texas Secessionsts win GOP backing for independence vote: 'Major step'www.newsweek.com The state GOP has backed a referendum on leaving the American Union in its 2024 legislative platform.

3. Nearly 60% of TX's pop is BIPOC, and new pop growth in TX is basically a 10:1 BIPOC to white ratio. So before you fire up your "let them go" hot takes, consider that you'd be advocating for the abandonment of a lot of folks (many disfranchised or inadequately represented) who hate this shit too

Texas Secessionsts win GOP backing for independence vote: 'Major step'www.newsweek.com The state GOP has backed a referendum on leaving the American Union in its 2024 legislative platform.

Also worth pointing out that, despite all these yahoos' bleating about Texas's "proud history" as an independent nation, most of the original TX leaders couldn't wait to be annexed to the US and that was the goal of most TX "revolutionaries." (Except Mirabeau Lamar, but he was an outlier)

The only reason it took 9 years for TX to be annexed was bc of northern opposition (ironically, there were threats from Massachusetts to secede if TX became part of the US!). The reason TX whites wanted independence from Mexico in the first place was bc Mexico abolished slavery in 1829.

They also had to wait for a free state to join before they could join as a slave state, right?

Post