On Tuesday, voters in Crook County passed measure 7-86, which asked voters if they support negotiations to move the Oregon/Idaho border to include Crook County in Idaho.  The measure is passing with 53% of the vote, and makes Crook County the 13th county in eastern Oregon to pass a Greater Idaho measure.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is so damn odd, it’s a state. Just move. It’s not another country. Shit like this is what makes me think we should just abolish the states honestly. This mindset is weird

    • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Some people are too poor to move. Just move is an insane idea and we need to eradicate it.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Just move is a perfectly legitimate idea when the only reason you want to move is because a political ideology. Not even political ideology wanting to impose your political ideology. If this was an economic issue I would never say just move. If this was a persecution issue I would never say just move. If this was any legitimate issue I would never say just move. However this is obviously, pathetically obviously, none of those things. They don’t like the people around them. They’re bigots. Bigots should move.

        Frankly I think it’s absurd that you’re even suggesting that they have some kind of legitimate gripe. Equating their issue to anything legitimate is beyond ignorant.

        • Cybermonk_Taiji@r.nf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Fucking EXACTLY!

          claiming these assholes are the disenfranchised ones is full on fascist lies. Sickening.

      • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        So moving is an insane idea, but transferring huge portions of land between states is totally rational and reasonable?

        • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          Considering that it’s just some imaginary line in the dirt that a bunch of people agree on the location of, yeah it’s a lot more rational than everything you go through to physically move

            • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              The concept of “Idaho” is an entirely societally defined concept. If everyone agrees you are in Idaho, then you are in Idaho. If all you care about is being in Idaho, and you can do that with less effort and resources than physically moving across state lines, why wouldn’t you do that?

              I think it’s a pretty short sighted and selfish thing to do, but it is entirely rational.

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          If you’re living paycheck to paycheck, you can’t afford to move. You can’t afford the moving van, you certainly can’t afford a week or two without work, and you can’t afford to go to job interviews in the place where you want to live.

          But if you don’t have to move, and instead you work with people around you to change the current geopolitical structure, that’s something that you can help be a part of by signing a petition or driving down to your town hall it’s a month for a meeting.

          I agree with you that overall it would make sense for people to move, but logistically many of them can’t. And even if they could, maybe they like the place they live. Maybe they’re lucky enough to own property, and the problem they have is not with their neighborhood, so they’d rather not replace it.

            • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              Yeah my apologies I was more responding to the second half of your commentary as it’s obvious I suggested that not them.

      • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The cost of living is cheaper in Idaho! They’d just be giving up things like 1/3 the per student spending, physicians leaving to avoid idaho’s abortion laws, and face lower road spending, worse unemployment rights… I mean the benefits are right there. For the rest of us in Oregon. Sign here, press hard, 3 copies. Finally we can get rid of those walkout issues in the house.

        Oregexit your hearts out. Don’t let the non gendered bathroom handle hit you on the ass as you go.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 months ago

        Seems like a stupid vote then: choose to leave a state with at least some services to join one without, just to make it easier for a few landowners to extract resources without regard to the environment

    • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      The idea of States and federal governments make no sense to me. Same country but different set of laws? Why even form a country?

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        The United States formed as a group of semi-sovereign political entities that wanted to make their own laws, but needed a common defense, foreign, and trade policy to prevent recolonization.

        The founding fathers knew that the country wouldn’t agree on everything, so they set up a system where a lot of decisions would be made by more local officials.

        Other federations work on the same principle. It is a lot easier to get political consensus in a smaller group than a larger one, so a lot of decisions are pushed to more local entities.

      • Cybermonk_Taiji@r.nf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s not a country and never has been, it’s a union of states.

        “State” in general terms usually refers to an entire country, notice the term “state department”

        Nation States. At it’s core the federal government was meant to be basically like the EU, each member retaining autonomy but joining the union and agreeing to abide by its rules in order to gain access to collective benefits.

        The reality of the situation is that this “country” was formed as a business proposition and that’s all it’s ever been. America is a business not a nation of people, the rest is pure propaganda.