Triggered: California secession, nothing more than a pro(re)gressive leftist crackpipe dream.

The following contains:
- Brutal social commentary (fine, I make fun of people here)
- Brutal satire
- Political incorrectness
- Liberal use of profanity
- Not a single damn being given for feelings

If these are things that you find to be triggering, please refer to this link to find your nearest safe space.

------

First things first I'll reiterate that I make a distinct separation between "liberals" and "leftists". Liberals are in support of individual rights and the rule of law. Leftists on the other hand are group rights supporting totalitarian social engineers. In this case, I'm more or less putting "leftist" and the California Democratic Party in the same basket.

That said.

Ok, so, well looks like butt-hurt has reached a level once again for talk of secession to rear it's ugly head again because the losers want to take their ball and go home. In 2008 it was Texas when Obama was elected, in 2016 it's California when Trump won the election.

And to these people I say... "Shut the fuck up, you ain't doing shit! You ain't going no where!"

This talk is stupid and pointless for a couple reasons. One there's the whole the Union Army to contend with. California is a state that has been dominated by partisan Democratic political ideology. It welcomes illegal immigrants (to the point that Ca Democrats for all intents and purposes want to dissolve the boarder with Mexico, more on that later) and it rams down gun-control on the rest of the state. In short California's urban centers, aside from the criminals, aren't armed to the extent of what you'd find in Texas. Keeping that in mind, there are multiple assets in California that the Federal government isn't just going to waive goodbye to and just let go. One being the major ports and shipping lanes in Long Beach. I believe it's the biggest port on the West Coast. Next there's Vandenburg AFB located in Santa Barbara County. Vandenburg is the largest domestic USAF base (the title of largest base goes to Ramstein AFB in Germany) and an important missile launch facility. We hear a lot about manned launches in Cape Canaveral in Florida, but a lot of unmanned launches are carried out at Vandenburg. In fact the Space Shuttle was going to operate from Vandenburg.

So lets put all these elements together. Most of the people that want California to secede because of Donald Trump are urban dwelling leftists. The majority of these urban dwelling lefitsts are opposed to private gun ownership, they're among the most die hard gun-control supporters you'll find outside of New York City. There are multiple important national assets in California that the Federal government won't just let go. So when the hypothetical "Calexit" happens, the Union Army (yes California secessionists, YOU are the Confederate Army) will be deployed to put down the insurgency. Other than maybe Ca National Guard units and military deserters that join the Ca Confederate Army, how the hell do these leftists expect to fight off the Union Army? What, with safe spaces?! With safety pins?! By crying on social media?! At least Texas can claim to have enough private gun owners to mount an insurgency that'll be on the level of Vietnam and Iraq (their secessionists are just as stupid, but they're not the topic of this particular codex entry) The people that own the guns in California won't want to live under a Ca Democrat one-party regime, they have little to no loyalty to the California Democratic Party and would like to see nothing more than a "March to Sea" by the Union Army with Sacramento as the destination (yes I know Sacramento is inland) so you'll expect no help from them, and I expect a portion of them to actively support the Union Army. I'm not even going to get into the gun-owners and other conservatives who want a "State of Jefferson" seeing a California Secession (come on, lets call it what it is, not this rosy term "Calexit") as their chance to make it happen, somewhat similar to how we got West Virginia when several counties of Virginia wanted to stay with the Union and broke away from the rest of the state. Expect to be run out of those counties. So I'll pose this question to Shervin Pishevar, "So you want to leave the Union? With what fucking army do you plan to do that with?! Your supporters aren't the ones who own all the guns in this state!"

And it might not even be limited to just the counties that would form Jefferson that would potentially break away from the secessionists and remain in the Union. About half the state voted for Trump, so in all likelihood, only half the state will go along with these whiny leftists, like Shervin Pishevar's bitch-ass, on their Quixotic crusade.

The Union Army would roll right in, while the Union Navy would blockade the State's major ports. Again, what do these leftists expect to do against the Union Navy? What, hijack the USS Iowa? I really doubt she can do much without her 16in shells and Tomahawk cruise missiles, and with a crew of safe space needing hippies and their safety pin wearing "allies". What are they going to do? Ask Vladimir Putin for help? Russia can barely keep their medium carrier (note: "carrier" as in singular), Admiral Kuznetsov in service, it wouldn't stand much of a chance against a full USN carrier battle-group centered around something like a Nimitz-class super-carrier.

You can see here the USN's Nimitz-class has a much larger hangar and carries more aircraft than the Admiral Kuznetsov, and the Nimitz-class isn't even the largest carrier class (Note: "class" as in plural) in the fleet anymore. While the Kuznetsov carries anti-ship missiles, that advantage would be off set with the battle group that would be accompanying the US carrier. The design of the Nimitz-class, making use of steam catapults to launch fighters as opposed to the Kuznetsov which uses a "ski-jump" to launch fighters. This means the Su-33s launching from the Kuznetsov need to have reduced payloads or fuel in order to take off, vs the F/A-18Es launching from the Nimitz-class which can be launched by the catapults with full fuel and payload. 

Additionally, the only real base the Russian Navy has in the Pacific is all the way in Vladivostok in the Russian Far East near Japan and they lack the logistical capability to conduct independent, long range, long term operations.  Ask Xi Jinping for help? Yeah, China doesn't even has an operations ready carrier which would be mission critical to long range, long term operations that the geography of the Pacific Ocean dictate. The non-operational one they bought off the Russians is used as a training ship. Let alone the logistical capability to conduct operations beyond the South China Sea. Maybe ask Pranab Mukherjee for help? India's in the process of building up it's navy, it's not going to send it into the teeth of the most powerful navy in the world several times over, just to help your hissy fit over Hillary Clinton losing. You think Japan is going to help you with the JMSDF? You think Britain will help you with the Royal Navy? You think France will help you with the Marine Nationale? Yeah, quit hitting the crack pipe, Washington's European and Pacific allies will stay on Washington's side. At most you'd probably get Rodrigo Duterte talking more of his usual shit, on your behalf.

Before anyone tells me the Union Army won't be deployed to crush a California secession, remember, the Federal government doesn't just let States leave the federation. There are 11 States that tried to do that about 150 years ago, and you can go and ask them about how well that all went down, once the Federal government got serious about it (hint: the most they have to show for that is a flag on a bright orange Dodge Charger). When those States tried to leave, Washington sent down the Army (eventually, once Grant took command) and deployed the Navy to blockade it's ports. It was simultaneously beaten down by a numerically and later technologically superior land army while getting strangled to death by the numerically and later technologically superior Navy. Somehow you think that won't happen to you? You really think you're that special and unique that Washington won't drop the hammer on you, because you're "tolerant progressive liberals"?

Oh and good luck getting an amendment passed that'll allow for a legal secession from the Union. Not when the Republicans have majorities in both houses of Congress, and Trump is poised to nominate the next SCOTUS judge.

Then lets take a look at the economic side of it. There's are two ways to look at economics. One, just the economic condition itself, and two economics as a weapon. The leftist secessionists always like to point that California would be just fine leaving the Union since we're the 6th largest economy, even larger than France. California is also $400 billion in the hole. You secessionist leftists like to claim, that California is in the hole because it's been sending so much of it's money to the Union's coffers. Well that's not true, California is $400 billion in the hole because of money owed on pensions. The situation is bad enough the Governor Jerry Brown said "it's so massive it's tempting to ignore it."

What kind of effect would that have on the 6th largest economy?

The costs associated with maintaining debt grow as it grows and remains unpaid. They may further harm the state’s fiscal sustainability by limiting its credit worthiness and ability to borrow. Furthermore, delaying massive debt repayment inherently weakens the state’s long-term financial sustainability because it poses the risk that those debt costs will become prohibitively expensive for future generations to repay.

 Without significant reform, citizens will continue financing rising debt interest, annual retirement benefit, and higher retiree health cost payments. In the long-term, chronically underfunded systems will hit critically low levels (as is currently occurring with the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or CalSTRS), meaning they will require ever larger bailouts going forward. Inaction will result in even greater tax burdens on citizens and/or additional cuts to key public services.

Yes California is a top exporter to the nation of computer electronics, second to Texas. Also a top exporter of transportation equipment and other non-electronic machinery. What would happen when California loses those domestic markets? As part of the Union, the Constitution and judicial rulings have placed protections on inter-state commerce. Individual states can't interfere with inter-state commerce. So right now, Nevada can't go and put tariffs on those electronic goods from California. Take that away, and then what? What happens when President Trump takes a more protectionist stance and encourages Texas to pick up the slack in those computer goods? Texas gets to keep it's market and enjoy the protections on inter-state commerce. California will have to negotiate trade deals to keep it's US markets and that's even IF that's on a table. IF Washington doesn't just decide to starve California into submission and have it crawling back into the Union. Of course that's also if Washington doesn't just decide to come in and regime change/annex the country because it got fed up having a 3rd world failed state right on it's boarder. Having a narco state on the boarder is plenty bad enough.

Speaking of exports, California is one of the largest dairy providers in the country. Sounds good for an independent California right? Well, many rural counties voted for Trump, those counties wouldn't go along with the leftist efforts at secession, so what happens if those counties that produce the milk don't secede with the leftists?

Mexico is California's number one export market. In 2013 Mexico also received $51.5 million in foreign aid from the US. You think Trump wouldn't use that as leverage to get Mexico to abide by trade sanctions put on California?

Then you have China, and the EU where California is a top exporter. They more than likely like the status quo. They're not going to want to risk roiling the market with the possibility of having to renegotiate trade deals. More than likely, they're going to back Washington. And even IF, somehow you get your way, you think they won't just negotiates deals much more favorable to them, now that you're not part of the US's economy? Given the huge debt, California is going to need those trade partners a lot, and don't think for a second they're not going to know that and not try to take advantage of the situation. Beijing is not going to give two-shits that you are "tolerant, progressive, liberals" and play nice with you, they're going to deal with you the same as everyone else.

At the time of this writing, the US imposed an embargo on Russia over it's activities in Ukraine. This put on a serious hurt on the Russian economy. You think during your hypothetical war of secession that you wouldn't be pimp slapped across the face with an economic embargo? You wouldn't be able to get or send out goods from our ports, blockaded by the USN. You wouldn't be able to get or send out goods into the other parts of the country, it would be safe bet to assume that the Union Army would have checkpoints at the major highways and roving patrols over the boarder. The Mexican boarder? Oh you can bet the Marines would deploy from 32nd Naval Station, along with the Union Army coming in from Arizona would put that boarder under lock down. 6th largest economy or not, you would be strangled to death if not militarily beaten down to death first.

And now lets get into the whole water situation...

Much of California's water supply is sourced in it's northern counties. Remember that "State of Jefferson" I mentioned that may carve itself out of a seceding California? Remember those counties that voted for Trump? Well, guess which counties much of California's water comes from? That's right, those counties would possibly break away to form their own state and remain in the Union and your hypothetical independent California would lose one of it's main sources of water, and you can bet the US wouldn't just give that water from Jefferson away. Which would leave the Colorado River as the main source.

Well look at that, if we refer to the maps above, the counties that get most of the water, would be counties that would make up Jefferson, or countries that voted for Trump. In other words, counties that likely wouldn't join the leftists secessionist efforts. 

California has been in a drought, especially in Southern California, since 2011. So that only really leaves the various smaller reservoir across the state and the Colorado River, and that's IF the counties that those reservoir are in and the counties with banks on the Colorado don't break away and stay a part of the Union. You can also bet, that those counties will have the Union Army present in them one way or the other, so you can forget about accessing that source of water.

Ok fine, you got a big coast on the Pacific, why not desalination plants like how Israel get's it's water? First off, these facilities are expensive to operate. needing a lot of power. They're also not very good for the environment. So you'd get the double whammy of being expensive to run, in a state that would be $400 billion in the hole, plus be bad for the environment, though I'd like to see what's more important to hippies, their water supply or the environment because to generate the electricity needed, you'd need either a lot of fossil fuel, or a nuclear reactor?

The water situation is bad enough that President Obama signed off on a bill for $558 million in federal founds for California drought relief. Now I'd like to see these leftist secessionists put their conviction where their money is and demand that Governor Brown send that money back.

Lastly I'll touch on the likely immigration policy for a hypothetical independent California, ruled over from Sacramento by the Ca Democratic Party (which I'd guess would change it's name to something like Worker's Party of California, or maybe United Socialist Party of California). There wouldn't be boarders. The California Democratic Party literally wants to turn the entire state into a "sanctuary state" where illegal immigrants would not be pursued and deported. In effect, our hypothetical independent California, under it's pro(re)gressive leftist regime would just get rid of the boarder. Anyone can come and go as they please. If anyone doesn't see why this is a bad idea, then you can tell me how well and open boarder policy is working out for countries in Europe. An independent California will inevitably have issues with large influxes of immigrants and experience similar if not the same levels of lawlessness as countries like Germany. And what do you think that's going to do for that $400 billion debt? How are you going to fix that, sell off California to China? Wait, no, don't answer that question...

Seriously Democrats, you got no where when you tried this secession shit 150 years ago. You got your collective asses federally handed to you via a .56-56 Spencer rimfire shot out of a Spencer Carbine. I know throwing a fit and being a bitch when ever you don't get your way is a part of your Party's heritage, but cut this shit out already. You leftists always like to harp on the rest of us about what year it is, well take your own advice, it's almost 2017, it's not 1861 anymore.