[ryandrake]

The huge problem is that geographical borders don't nicely line up with cultural/ethnic/attitude borders. Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? They're now at a huge risk. Those dissenters might even be persecuted or, at worst, cleansed, depending on the laws of the new seceded country.

So then you say, ok let's do it by county (or whatever the Canadian equivalent is) instead. Same problem. Even within a county-sized area, you're going to have dissenters who are at risk in the new country. Even within a single town. You can't draw geographic borders around and write laws for swiss-cheese-shaped clumpings of individual people.

I live in a pretty "red" area in a "blue" US state. If Team Red decided that half of my state (including my home) was going to secede into their own Red Utopia, my family would legitimately be in fear for our lives. I don't think secession is ever going to be a viable option in the real, polarized world where political beliefs are peanut butter spread across the geography.

[xboxnolifes]

> Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride?

Well, thats politics? The people proposing this are supposed to be considering that. And the people in that position are supposed to be considering that.

Every day there are votes with outcomes people dont want to go along with the ride for. But they do, or they resist, or otherwise.

[scrubs]

Politics? Is it? Or is politics a grand word for whining and adults in a perpetual small world? Law, history are at least more grounded as a basis to argue for or against.

Let's not let politics' meaning become so diffuse it's just free speech by another name. Herein "politics" seems to be too inconsequential for a far more consequential result than cycling out party A for B for a few years would have.

I've half joked before that brexit was the only solution Cameron et al saw left because they didnt have a way to hold Brussel's paper pushers to account. Taking your ball and going home is not bold leadership: it's an admission one's argument and solution is weak.

[yibg]

In this case though it's a conflicting view. Let's say 40% of the province don't want to be separated, so they vote to rejoin canada (or form their own thing). Does the now independent Alberta allow it? If not, then why are they allowed to split from Canada? If they do, now this opens up the door for a infinite amount of splits.

[xboxnolifes]

Well, it would depend on how the new Alberta is structured. It would be its own country with its own rules. Practically speaking, it would highly depend on whether those 40% are geographically separated from the rest enough to geographically split the new Alberta.

[ben_w]

> Well, thats politics? The people proposing this are supposed to be considering that. And the people in that position are supposed to be considering that.

People are very bad at considering stuff like this. Both voters and politicians.

When I left the UK, a former acquaintance was very confused that their support of something they thought was "just politics" led to me having no interest in continuing to talk to them.

I very much doubt that David Cameron or Theresa May expected a newspaper to have a front-page headline calling judges "Enemies of the People"[0], similarly for a half the politicians who have been milkshaked[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemies_of_the_people_(headlin...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milkshaking

[gambiting]

>>What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride?

All of Scotland voted against leaving the EU. Every single county has voted no. And yet it still got dragged out.

So I guess the answer is - people get told to shut up and deal with it.

[happymellon]

The area of England that I'm in voted remain, as well as all the other districts around us. It might fracture England (which may not be a bad thing) but I would be fine with southern England joining Scotland.