  Plebiscitary (or voluntarist) theories are more permissive than remedial right only theories and ascriptivist theories: they permit unilateral secession in the absence of injustice and do not require that the members of the seceding group share any characteristic other than the desire to form their own state. Plebiscitary theorists ground the right to secede in the right to self-determination (Wellman 2005: ch. 3). For them, self-determination is in itself of such great value that it can ground a right to complete political autonomy given certain conditions. The most prominent proponent of the plebiscitary view, Christopher Wellman, argues that the right to self-determination generates a right to secede if and only if (a) any group that constitutes a majority within a portion of some given territory votes in favor of secession, (b) that group is willing and able to establish a well-functioning independent state, and (c) its secession will not undermine the remainder state’s ability to function as well (Wellman 1995; Wellman 2005: ch. 3; Altman and Wellman 2009: ch. 3). Let us call (a) the majority vote condition and the conjunction of (b) and (c) the state viability proviso. Satisfying the state viability proviso is not likely to be easy in most cases, particularly where the establishment of a new set of institutions is concerned. The viability proviso, then, limits the permissiveness of the plebiscitary view.