Does a state have the right to become communist?

[King]

When a discussion of "states' rights" usually comes up, it's mainly by those on the right to protect their socially and economically conservative views in their socially and economically conservative states.

But what if the states' rights issue came from the left? The far left?

Let's say legitimate constitutional conservatives came into power in Washington, pretty much stripped the federal government and sent issues back to the states.  Could, say, Vermont then use their new found freedom and self-reliance from the Feds to establish some form of Utopian socialist society?

Capitalism isn't formally protected by the Constitution.  It's biggest protection at the federal level seems to be the limits the federal government has on controlling the states.  Yet the states themselves can do whatever they want.

Thoughts?

[Antonio the Sixth]

[DWTL]But Vermont is already communist !!![/DWTL]

[Frink]

As long as they remain a Republic and don't violate the constitution in the process, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is not completely true.

[King]

As long as they remain a Republic and don't violate the constitution in the process, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is not completely true.

Well, yes, they obviously have some limitations.  But none of those are so stringent that they could prevent non-capitalistic economic policy.  At worst, it would require some creative workarounds.

[Frink]

As long as they remain a Republic and don't violate the constitution in the process, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is not completely true.

Well, yes, they obviously have some limitations.  But none of those are so stringent that they could prevent non-capitalistic economic policy.  At worst, it would require some creative workarounds.

Could such a society sustain itself without the ability to limit trade?

[King]

As long as they remain a Republic and don't violate the constitution in the process, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is not completely true.

Well, yes, they obviously have some limitations.  But none of those are so stringent that they could prevent non-capitalistic economic policy.  At worst, it would require some creative workarounds.

Could such a society sustain itself without the ability to limit trade?

Perhaps not full-fledgling communism.  Foundations of one could be laid and a coalition of states who did this definitely could be sustainable.

[The Mikado]

The Republican Guarantee Clause is a lot further reaching than it appears.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

How does a state become communist?

[Phony Moderate]

How does a state become communist?

[John Dibble]

They could try, but the fact is they'd be limited in what they could do because they couldn't usurp powers that are reserved for the federal government. Also, I imagine that they'd collapse very quickly consider the state would go bankrupt rather quickly - they'd have to buy up every last business asset in the state, which would be inordinately expensive since the Constitution requires just compensation.

[Free Palestine]

How does a state become communist?

[k-onmmunist]

How does a state become communist?

[tpfkaw]

No, states don't have rights.  "States' rights" could be better phrased as "things the federal government cannot legally do."

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The failure to be able to regulate interstate commerce (as well as international) would probably lead to a failure of an attempt of a state to become communist.

[Free Palestine]

Actually, yeah, it would probably interfere with the Commerce Clause, which was intended to give Congress the power to remove interstate barriers to free trade.

[Gustaf]

Having the right to be communist doesn't make much sense since communism isn't really rights-based.

That is, a communist state cannot really accept other states and still function. It must deny the citizens of other states the right to interact, both politically and financially, with its own. So it isn't really a question of whether other states would grant it the right to be communist.

[dead0man]

The OP's attempt to bash "states rights" might have worked if it wasn't for you meddling kids and your damned logic and facts.  Try again Batman, maybe you'll get lucky next time.

[King]

The OP's attempt to bash "states rights" might have worked if it wasn't for you meddling kids and your damned logic and facts.  Try again Batman, maybe you'll get lucky next time.

Communist was probably kind of an extreme terminology.  Bland generalized "socialist" didn't have as nice of a thread title ring to it.

[Roemerista]

It has the right, as much as a state having the "right" to secede. Having a planned economy would probably go against the values of the other states, and the all powerful Commerce Clause can have its say.