NationStates

As a native Oregonian, I have been watching politics unfold outside of my birth state without Oregon being in the rough. The only other time I remember us being influential was the "Death With Dignity" Act of 1996.
But now with so much time on their hands, you have the Cascadian Movement which is basically the Pacific North West states, California (Maybe), British Columbia, Yukon, Northwest Territories and Alaska which would make us a really large country.
Than you have the idiotic, never gonna happen, State of Jefferson Idea that is absolutely the worst thing Ive ever heard thats failed so badly its extremely embarrassing for the man who invented the idea.
Than you have the movement of people who want Oregon, and just Oregon to leave the Union.
Technically Oregon does have a choice because before they became a state in 1859, they have had a Provisional Government for decades with their own constitution and everything.
"No free white male can claim more than 1 sq mile or more than 640 Acres."
Although Oregon has had its history of racism and even had a KKK member gain popularity in the government.
So, whats your thoughts?
Should Oregon leave? Should Cascadia become a thing?

It seems a little less ridiculous than the State of Jefferson, but even still it's kinda vague on what sort of state Cascadia would be.

Cordel One wrote:It seems a little less ridiculous than the State of Jefferson, but even still it's kinda vague on what sort of state Cascadia would be.

Exactly, but with everything going on right now and even the "Western Pact" that California, Oregon, and Washington made together, it sounds like a country already doesnt it?

I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

Take a map of the US, and look at the US without Oregon. Pretend it does not exist.

Does not the US look weird?

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

America's San Marino.

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

Take a map of the US, and look at the US without Oregon. Pretend it does not exist.

Does not the US look weird?

It does look weird, and Im not fully agreeing with it, but Cascadia or the Western Pact would have Canada and the USA lose their West Coasts

Bala Mantre wrote:

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

Take a map of the US, and look at the US without Oregon. Pretend it does not exist.

Does not the US look weird?

It does look weird, and Im not fully agreeing with it, but Cascadia or the Western Pact would have Canada and the USA lose their West Coasts

Cascadia would still leave over California, but I ehard some of them want to "go away," as well as Texas.

-Astoria- wrote:

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

America's San Marino.

Looks weirder than the SM-Italy.

Despite being a one time Cascadia supporter no I do not currently support it.

Also California is not and should not be considered part of the prospective nation.

Go for it. It's better the American Empire be put down like the rabid dog it is than be allowed to linger on for another 40 years.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Despite being a one time Cascadia supporter no I do not currently support it.

Also California is not and should not be considered part of the prospective nation.

Wouldn't want our superior cultural influence to take over.

La xinga wrote:

Bala Mantre wrote:It does look weird, and Im not fully agreeing with it, but Cascadia or the Western Pact would have Canada and the USA lose their West Coasts

Cascadia would still leave over California, but I ehard some of them want to "go away," as well as Texas.

-Astoria- wrote:America's San Marino.

Looks weirder than the SM-Italy.

We do really hate Californians over here in Oregon but if we did leave, as California is the fifth best economy in the world, we wouldnt want to let that slip through our fingers.
But oh well.
Thing is, it already seems like it has already happened during COVID-19 and we dont really know what Americans reactions will be after the election...

-Astoria- wrote:

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

America's San Marino.

Nah not really all that comparable, San Marino is a micro-state, Oregon is not. Plus what about Vatican City, the smallest country in the world is basically a micro-city state within a capital city?

As a non-American who has visited the PNW on a number of occasions and has many friends in the area, Cascadia as an independent nation has always intrigued me. There is quite a clear difference in terms of culture/geography/demeanour I feel between the areas inside and outside the bioregion. I don't think in practice it will happen, nor do I have much hope for any succession movements in the US right now, but the fate of the union might certainly be in more jeopardy right now than it ever has been in recent years. Who knows what can happen?

I for one would welcome Cascadian independence. Plus the Doug Flag is pretty cool!

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

For California did you read that the wrong way round or type it the wrong way round?

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

Take a map of the US, and look at the US without Oregon. Pretend it does not exist.

Does not the US look weird?

Eh, the Gambia exists so the world is already used to fuck ugly borders.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Despite being a one time Cascadia supporter no I do not currently support it.

Also California is not and should not be considered part of the prospective nation.

It's not like California has the world's 5th largest economy. As many downsides as California may have, it is an economic powerhouse.

Monsone wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Despite being a one time Cascadia supporter no I do not currently support it.

Also California is not and should not be considered part of the prospective nation.

It's not like California has the world's 5th largest economy. As many downsides as California may have, it is an economic powerhouse.

California's economy is many things, but it has many structural issues that would give it a great deal of headache should it go independent. Oh well, that's their problem.

Corinthina wrote:As a non-American who has visited the PNW on a number of occasions and has many friends in the area, Cascadia as an independent nation has always intrigued me. There is quite a clear difference in terms of culture/geography/demeanour I feel between the areas inside and outside the bioregion. I don't think in practice it will happen, nor do I have much hope for any succession movements in the US right now, but the fate of the union might certainly be in more jeopardy right now than it ever has been in recent years. Who knows what can happen?

I for one would welcome Cascadian independence. Plus the Doug Flag is pretty cool!

It really does look like a really cool flag, but get this.
The Pacific North Western Accent (Neutral Accent) is considered the most proper Non British English out there.
Plus, our culture is very much different from other states like how our Oregon flag is double sided
And yes, with Biden vrs Trump, my father believes that no matter whos voted in, someones gonna leave

To also understand what it would look like, Oregon is a very big state with a little population as well.
But with our geography, we have a lot of natural defenses

Heloin wrote:

La xinga wrote:I think it should stay. If California gets a lot of money from the states, Probably Oregon does.

In terms of reliability on the Fed Gov, Oregon is exactly #25 in reliability on the Fed Gov. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-l ... government)

For California did you read that the wrong way round or type it the wrong way round?

Plus, Oregon would look weird alone. If it left the states alone, it would look like a independent square.

Take a map of the US, and look at the US without Oregon. Pretend it does not exist.

Does not the US look weird?

Eh, the Gambia exists so the world is already used to fuck ugly borders.

1. I stand by what I said. I know it's 41, but it still takes cash out which it needs.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... m-the-u-s/

#4 shows us it's debt, the thing holding it up is the country as a whole.

2. Oregon out of the union looks weirder.

Kowani wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:Despite being a one time Cascadia supporter no I do not currently support it.

Also California is not and should not be considered part of the prospective nation.

Wouldn't want our superior cultural influence to take over.

More like we don't need the state to ruin another nation. Cascadia should be Washington, Oregon, Idaho and British Columbia, with maybe a handful of other places.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Kowani wrote:Wouldn't want our superior cultural influence to take over.

More like we don't need the state to ruin another nation. Cascadia should be Washington, Oregon, Idaho and British Columbia, with maybe a handful of other places.

Plus Washingtonians and Oregonians already have created a superior culture, I mean Washington came out of Oregon

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Kowani wrote:Wouldn't want our superior cultural influence to take over.

More like we don't need the state to ruin another nation. Cascadia should be Washington, Oregon, Idaho and British Columbia, with maybe a handful of other places.

Alaska and Yukon maybe?

La xinga wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
More like we don't need the state to ruin another nation. Cascadia should be Washington, Oregon, Idaho and British Columbia, with maybe a handful of other places.

Alaska and Yukon maybe?

Cascadian Movement:
Oregon, Washington, Idaho, British Columbia, Yukon, Northwest Territories, Alaska and maybe even California

Bear Stearns wrote:California's economy is many things, but it has many structural issues that would give it a great deal of headache should it go independent. Oh well, that's their problem.

I'm not denying that. Having lived in California, I know what issues plauge the state. That being said, the economies of Washington and Oregon are fairly dependent on California. The tech sector in Seattle is made up of companies often (though not always) based in Silicon Valley with branches in Seattle. The aerospace sector in Washington is dependent on the aerospace industry in Southern California, the Central Valley is still a huge food-producing region, and some of the best universities in the US are in California.

With some reforms and possibly a water pipeline, California can easily be an integral part of an independent Cascadia.

No. It’s a ridiculous idea largely driven by “we don’t like how the rest of the state votes therefore we are going up pack up and leave.”