[pvg]

It's hardly controversial that whatever Wilson's ideas were, they did not include Texas becoming an independent country. I also don't think it's controversial that all the intricate thinking, principles and international proclamations on self-determination don't actually boil down to 'any group or region can easily turn themselves into a sovereign country, if they really want to and work hard at it'.

[toyg]

Obviously there are parameters, but Wilson's principles have been one of the pillars of modern international relations. Discounting them would mean throwing us back to "might makes right", which is a recipe for permanent war.

If you want to discuss why Texas does not meet parameters for independent statehood in your opinion, I'm happy to listen; but you cannot unilaterally say an unexplained "no" without looking very clearly tyrannical.

[afarrell]

We still live in a world where might makes right. We also live in a world where the mighty identify themselves with certain principles and have certain incentives...which is why our current state of permanent war (since 2001 at least) is relatively mild

[toyg]

> We still live in a world where might makes right.

I'd like to think that's not the case. The proof is that we have states that, if it were only due to pure power, would have no business existing (the Baltic ones, Singapore, most Caribbean ones, etc).

I am not so silly to think that might is not a factor in international relations, but I also think we must strive to be better every day, resolving our problems in ways that don't always boil down to pure power. Otherwise we're just left with tribes and spears.