The idea of California seceding from the U.S., known as “Calexit,” has gained prominence in social and political movements, especially during times of tension. Let’s explore the reasons behind this proposal!
Political and Cultural Differences:
California is predominantly progressive, often clashing with the conservative policies of the federal government, especially during the Trump administration. Issues such as immigration and climate change are points of conflict.
Disproportionate Economic Contribution:
As the largest economy in the U.S., California contributes significantly to federal taxes. Some argue that the state “supports” other regions without receiving proportional benefits in infrastructure or social programs.
Legislative Autonomy:
California already has strict laws in areas like the environment and labor rights. Independence would allow for greater freedom to implement progressive policies without federal government interference.
Unique Cultural Identity:
With its diversity and strong technology and entertainment economy, many Californians see the state as culturally distinct from the rest of the country. This unique identity reinforces the idea of secession.
Recent Events:
The tensions during the Trump administration and the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the differences in public policy between California and the federal government, reigniting the debate over the possibility of secession.
I don’t think there is an expectation of canceling water deals due to a calexit. Calexit folks aren’t planning on incurring further US hostilities since so much of the country already has a unique disdain for CA. They are anticipating a “fine good riddance enjoy your liberal hellhole you socialists” style reaction from enough of the country to avoid any intense sanctioning or violence with the rest of the US. No one with any pull is advocating taking up arms or anything wild like that. They liken the effort to being a constituent country as is Scotland in the UK. More independent than a US-style state less independent than a separate sovereign state like are the US and Canada. I haven’t any idea if they ought to be worried about water deals, I just think that’s the organization’s line so to speak.
The US isn’t going to let the world’s 4th largest economy go any time soon. For the foreseeable future, I think this project is folly.
I certainly don’t see any value in volunteering my time or resources to the cause. As far as I can tell as a midwestern transplant to the Bay Area, the differences between CA identity and the rest of the US is wildly overstated by dum dum politicians trying to score cheap points with their constituents in the red Midwest and deep south.
The only reason I could see CA becoming some kind of US territory is that for whatever reason, the kind of people outside CA who would be the happiest to see CA no longer being as large an influence in US politics just refuse to acknowledge that CA is the primary US economic engine.
Using the same logic, I’d be perfectly happy if the deep south seceded and drowned in their own hubris. They’re federal tax drains that ideologically conflict with basic human decency. I’d build the wall around those states myself if it paid a living wage. It isn’t my choice in a vacuum though. For every action there’s at least an equal and opposite reaction. The states that otherwise benefit from access to the Colorado River all need that water and have a more valid claim to it. I know those same Colorado reactionaries who think California is a liberal-socialist hellhole and they’d vote for anyone who wants to impose the strictest response to Californian sovereignty. Any reactionary politician in those purple/red states will immediately seize on it as the largest opportunity to enshrine themselves to every agribusiness/real estate donor in the region.
The cliche of the 21st century is that our grandchildren will die in the water wars. That’s what a water war looks like and California’s water access is split between its own north and south. They lack unity if 60%~ of the southern half of the state’s water supply has any kind of even hypothetical risk.