PETITION: Government to indicate countries of the UK are open to accede to the US

Sign the Petition

A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States

Executive Summary

This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom, to the United States, as individual states. 

Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States.

The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union.

If Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, or England were to leave the United Kingdom, it would end their system of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. Instead, if they joined the United States as separate states, they would govern themselves under the U.S. federal system while receiving its protection.

This proposal recognises that immediate change is unlikely but urges a serious conversation to address the disconnect in UK leadership. It encourages the government to ask the public, with their honest help, to critically evaluate different governance models and reflect on the ideals of nationalism, patriotism and multiculturalism, considering with far more care than before their long-term effects on future generations.

The Petition

To The Petitions Office, House of Commons. Petition #738541.

I want to start a petition – will you sign it?

Sign the petition

Government to indicate countries of the UK are open to accede to the US

Calling on HM Government to indicate that it is in principle open to negotiations for some or all of the countries of the UK to secede, and accede to the US as federal states of the Union

Normally parliament does not get involved in what a foreign state might want to do. This petition is to ask the government to make it known to the US that it is ready to negotiate accession, not to act directly right away. See here for more detail: https://bit.ly/usukpetition

Sign the petition

Petition Attempt History

Attempt	Number	Start Date	End Date	Notes
1	716340	31/01/25		orphaned by the petitions team without notice
2	716683	04/02/25	15/05/25	rejected as a mistake thinking it was petition 716340
3	736481	07/08/25	20/08/25	rejected 20/08/25 due to not being specific enough
4	738541	20/08/25		in progress

Worksheet Link Here

The Rationale - Why is This a Good Idea? 

The integration of UK nations as US states could streamline governance and address domestic challenges, notably in Ireland and with the monarchy, judiciary and church, while mitigating historical tensions. Economically, each UK nation aligns with the scale of a US state. Geopolitically, their strategic position in the West would ensure robust federal protection, enhancing stability and security.

Strategic Intent of Proposal

This initiative is not anticipated to materialise but aims to catalyse discourse on critical issues neglected by recent and current governments, hindered by entrenched mindsets. It seeks to address polarised views on American influence, despite its achievements, and challenge divisive ideological barriers. This is a bipartisan thought experiment; taking sides reverts to the negative program this proposal seeks to transcend. Should integration occur, it could be a significant, unforeseen benefit.

Positive Factors for UK Accession to the US

This petition offers several compelling factors that could foster authentic dialogue:

• Shared Language and Legal Heritage: The US, rooted in English language and British legal traditions, shares a cultural and historical foundation with the UK. This alignment counters efforts to erode these commonalities, facilitating integration. 

• Renewed Identity and Self-Determination: UK citizens would gain a revitalised identity within the US framework, with each nation recovering internal self-determination as states, provided they adhere to federal guidelines, reversing centuries of centralised control.

• Strengthened Civil Liberties: Accession would align the UK with the US Constitution’s robust protections, particularly for freedom of speech(1st amendment), addressing recent erosions of democratic rights in the UK. 

• Regional Integration and Conflict Resolution: Accession of one or more of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland could also encourage Ireland and British Overseas Territories, Canada and Australia to join, addressing their own internal governance challenges. This reframes UK countries and others as partners, diminishing historical animosities. Note that accession could happen unilaterally by each country. None have to act simultaneously further reinforcing the opportunity to resolve historic challenges.

• Self Determined Government Revenue: As separate states, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and England could each decide how to fund their own governments. They could choose taxation methods that best suit their local needs, while still paying federal taxes. This would allow them to adopt effective local tax systems, free from unsuitable or harmful taxation imposed by the former UK structure. Likewise, federalism grants substantial autonomy to each state, in general.

• Enhanced Global Security: As US states, the UK nations would bolster Western security, serving as a frontline defence, significantly strengthening global stability. This would be 'paid for' with significant and world leading protection.

• Historical Precedent: The transition from Rome to Constantinople provides a historical analogy, demonstrating how power can shift to a culturally aligned entity, preserving and enhancing shared values. In the notes at the end of this document you can find many historic case histories where this has been attempted before, it is nothing new.

• Geopolitical Advantages for the US: Incorporating UK nations would provide strategic geographic benefits, enhancing US influence in the West. Current efforts to acquire British territories suggest existing interest in such expansion.

These factors provide a resilient foundation for dialogue, leveraging shared heritage and mutual benefits to counter opposition and promote a transformative vision for governance.

Contextual Analysis

A majority, including intelligentsia, NGO's, bureaucrats, civil servants, politicians and corporate management, often fail to critically consider the future for our descendants, and usually mostly for entrenched interests. Yet they are widely regarded as leaders. And these groups are likely to dismiss this proposal out of hand as absurd to undermine dialogue and protect these entrenched interests. This circular reaction typifies the kind of resistance we're trying to overcome with the petition and is outlined well in this historic document: Notes on Nationalism.

Potential Consequences of Inaction

The United Kingdom faces significant risks if current institutional trends persist without intervention. Key constitutional pillars—the monarchy, the Church of England, and the judiciary—are weakening, potentially destabilising the governance framework.

• Monarchy: The monarchy, a cornerstone of British identity and constitutional stability, faces uncertainty with an aging monarch and a perceived lack of robust succession, risking its symbolic and unifying role.

• Church of England: As Supreme Governor, the monarch binds the Church to the state, but its declining influence erodes this constitutional cement, threatening the established religious framework integral to governance. This does not mean more religion, but highlights the risks of not taking action. Also, one does not need to be religious to see that historically the people have had agency on civil rights if they can point to a line of succession through religion.

• Judiciary: The replacement of the Law Lords with the Supreme Court in 2009, under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, has severed the judiciary’s historical tie to the House of Lords, reducing its constitutional integration and perceived authority. There's a growing perception the judiciary is packed with activists, particularly in the Supreme Court.

The erosion of these institutions, rooted in centuries of tradition, creates a vacuum that could enable unchecked nationalist power to emerge, a trend arguably accelerating over the past three decades. Without proactive measures, the UK risks further fragmentation and instability, potentially ceding control to far more dangerous divisive forces, creating a wide attack surface on which to target our descendants.

Historical Context of Institutional Decline

The erosion of the key UK institutions above was likely accelerated post-World War II with the establishment of the welfare state, which shifted societal priorities. This was further intensified by the civil rights movements of the 1960s, challenging traditional authority structures. Most recently, the 2019 prorogation of Parliament following Brexit and its ruling as unlawful by the Supreme Court, underscored ongoing vulnerabilities, exacerbating instability and highlighting the weakening of these foundational pillars.

A Potential Roadmap for Inaction or of Continuing Neglect

• If the king dies, the prince is not reliable and a regency is not acceptable, who will rule? A dying monarchy is already setting this future in motion.
• Would parliament prefer a republic if it could not solve this problem? A new republic is not in the least bit simple to set up from scratch. We only need to observe the shenanigans on all sides during Brexit which was an easy transition technically, relative to a creating a new republic.
• We have no written constitution which would be hard to develop from nothing and the US has a ready made one which closely matches UK values.

Balkanisation

Most recently, the state's alleged attacks on its own people, while tacitly supporting foreign groups via mass migration and open borders, and the growing view it treats the foreign groups with special privilege, could lead swiftly to the UK's division and potential civil war. One could reasonably argue there's a cold civil war already underway with the two sides already visible and well understood. This allegation, though not held universally is nonetheless held by many. And if true is likely to be rooted in the state's inaction and neglect over the past 30 years.

Does It Need to be a Sale of the UK to the US?

No. But that has been the approach of the US as it tries to acquire other states recently. It might be that the UK countries would be happy to accede for free or, the US seeing it as a benefit in itself may well make a bid to buy if they knew we were serious about it. The positioning of the petition as a sale would be largely to attract more attention to the idea and get a serious dialogue going with a critical mass, before alerting entrenched interests who are likely to undermine its widespread public scrutiny.

Conclusion

This non partisan thought experiment proposes the accession of UK nations as US states as a way to spark critical discourse on governance, identity, prosperity and future stability for our descendants. By leveraging shared language, legal heritage, and geopolitical advantages, it offers a transformative vision to address institutional decline, resolve historical conflicts, and enhance global security. While unlikely to materialise, a dialogue challenges entrenched mindsets, urging stakeholders to prioritise self-determination, civil liberties, and a unified identity to secure future generations. Engaging in this conversation counters the neglect of current leadership and fosters a proactive examination of nationalism, patriotism, and multiculturalism, ensuring a legacy of resilience and progress.

Notes:

Some Interesting Case Histories

A more comprehensive list can be found here on Grok

Accession (nations/states joining a larger entity):

Accession typically involves voluntary integration, often through referendums or negotiations, and requires agreement from the larger entity.

1. Scotland, Wales, England (1707): Formed Great Britain via Acts of Union.
2. Ireland (1800): The Act of Union 1800 merged the Kingdom of Ireland with the Kingdom of Great Britain to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, effective January 1, 1801.
3. UK Accession to the EU (1973): The United Kingdom joined the European Economic Community (EEC), precursor to the EU, on January 1, 1973, alongside Ireland and Denmark. Accession followed negotiations starting in 1970, after two earlier applications (1963, 1967) were vetoed by France. A 1975 referendum confirmed UK membership, with 67% voting to stay.
4. EU Accessions: E.g., Germany, France (1957, founding members); UK (1973); Eastern European states like Poland, Hungary (2004); Croatia (2013)
5. Post Soviet EU Accessions:
1. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (2004): Baltic states joined EU after meeting democratic and economic criteria, following 1991 independence from USSR.
2. Czech Republic, Slovakia (2004): Joined EU after 1993 split of Czechoslovakia and reforms.
3. Slovenia (2004): Ex-Yugoslav state, gained independence 1991, met EU standards.
6. East Germany (1990): Acceded to West Germany, forming unified Germany.
7. Hawaii (1959): Became a U.S. state after a referendum.
8. Texas (1845): Independent republic joined the United States after a vote.
9. Newfoundland (1949): Joined Canada after referendums, ending British dominion status.
10. Italian Unification (1861-1870): Various states (e.g., Tuscany, Sicily) joined to form Italy.
11. Saudi Arabia (1932): Regional territories unified under Ibn Saud.

Successful secession cases:

Secession often involves referendums, conflict, or negotiation, with outcomes depending on international recognition and internal politics.

1. United States (1776): American war of independence. Declared independence from Great Britain. You could argue this was also the most recent English civil war.
2. UK (Brexit, 2020): Seceded from the European Union after a 2016 referendum, formalised in 2020.
3. Collapse of the Soviet Union 1991: independence of 14 republics from USSR (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan). Russia as successor. 
4. Ireland 1921: formally seceded from the United Kingdom with the signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, which led to the creation of the Irish Free State
5. Czechoslovakia Split (1993): Peaceful dissolution into Czech Republic and Slovakia.
6. Yugoslavia breakup (1991-1992): independence of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia.
7. South Sudan (2011): Gained independence from Sudan after a referendum, following decades of civil war.

Failed or contested cases:

1. Scotland (2014): Voted against independence from the UK in a referendum.
2. Quebec (1995): Narrowly voted to remain part of Canada in a referendum.
3. Catalonia (2017): Declared independence from Spain after a referendum, but Spain rejected it, leading to legal and political conflict.
4. Kurdish Autonomous Region (Iraq, 1991–present): Gained de facto autonomy post-Gulf War under a no-fly zone. 2017 independence referendum failed due to lack of international support and Iraqi opposition.

Other and ongoing case histories:

• Alaska (1867): Russia sold Alaska to the United States for $7.2 million, not a secession or accession but a territorial transfer via treaty. No referendum; Russia deemed it unprofitable to maintain.
• The state of Alberta wishes to secede from Canada today.
• Scotland 2025: may well still wish to secede from the UK already
• Palestine 2025: The ongoing question about if Palestine has ever been a state and if Israel has always been indigenous there.
• Palestinian Authority (partial, ongoing): Established via Oslo Accords (1993), but full statehood remains contested, with no successful secession from Israel. Some countries recognise Palestine, but it lacks full sovereignty.