  Stilz’s conception of the value of basic justice can be satisfied by Wellman’s viability proviso, and his simple majority vote requirement bears directly on the way in which she conceives the value of collective self-determination, namely, in terms of a shared will. Wellman could say that a group that has voted to leave the state and be independently self-determining no longer shares the relevant political will with the broader citizenry of the original state. Stilz holds that an important part of the political will is a willingness and/or desire to engage (or continue engaging) in a political project with members of the greater state. A vote in favor of secession is a clear indication that such a desire is no longer shared by a majority of that plebiscite—they do not affirm existing institutions and do not share a commitment to cooperating with them. In this way, the original state can no longer be taken to reflect the population’s shared will. Using Stilz’s theory of territory, then, Wellman could argue that the separatist group has a clearly stronger claim to the disputed territory than the original state does. Whether this appeal to Stilz’s view works will depend on whether the notion of a shared will can be spelled out and shown to be of such crucial importance that the absence of it on the part of some groups within the state defeats a legitimate state’s claim to territory.