Has the United States reached the point where break up

[nadinbrzezinski]

should be considered?

We have nine regions in North America, that have been identified clearly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Nations_of_North_America

And the recent disasters and how people diss regions tells me that we are at that point, where we need
to seriously consider secession and the creation of a new map. We are Americans but in name only, and whole regions truly hate each other, or simply cannot identify with people from other regions.

A post this morning was one more proof that folks from the center of the country do not identify with the coasts, and so on

There are gathering storms of a hot civil war. We have been in the midst of a cold one for years... but is it time to seriously consider
breaking the country into regions that are more ethnically together?

After all, I admit it, I do not identify with the bible belt, (and yesterday having Jon Taylor interview that preacher firmed that up)

I don't begrudge people in the middle of a disaster, but some people did this week, just as they did when Katrina hit... During katrina the stereotype was poor and black.,.. here it was rich and spoiled, never mind those were story-lines created by the media swallowed by people whole.

And of course we had the President refer to both California and NOLA as if we were in a foreign country.

Otherwise the divisions are so deep that I fear a very hot, and sharp civil war... and the clouds are in the horizon... the storm is gathering... and the first sparks (bad pun I know, especially this week) we have already seen. Every time we see the bombings of clinics, that is a spark.. when the Militias were getting ready to liberate a woman who was brain dead, that was a spark... so my question is... do we want the break up to be peaceful or not? As the empire contrast it will happen... so how violent do we want it?

[redqueen]

1. Divide and conquer?

I'm against allowing corporate malfeasance to turn us against each other. Things are not that bad, it's just that assholes get more attention than sensible people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

For any student of how civil wars develop

the gathering clouds are there... the storm is getting darker and darker

And imperial contraction leads to serious problems...

Imperial contraction is starting

And the economy is about to collapse

The recipee for disolution is there

So yes things are potentially that bad

And I posed this as a very seriious question

[redqueen]

8. I know things are potentially that bad.

I just don't see that your proposed solution would solve anything.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. If different regions became successor states

and people from Michigan didn't have to worry about crazayy californians, it would solve somethings...

It may also avoid the shooting if we manage to do this peacefully

[redqueen]

18. That's just silly.

There are crazy people everywhere.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. As a STUDENT of history

I can tell you that there are times you do split in order to avoid ugly things from happening

and this country no longer has a NATIONAL identity

Blame whoever you want to blame... but that is a new reality

[LanternWaste]

61. Let's assume for a moment that...

Let's assume for a moment that America in fact, no longer has a national identity (of which, I disagree). It seems to me that as there are absolutely no regional divides that separate ideologies, religions, cultures, or faiths in America (outside of anecdotes and rude jokes), then separation on this scale and for that reason could not happen.

However, that being said, I believe that the 20th century has unified America to a point (through communication and ease of travel) in which the prior emphases on regionalism are nothing more than quaint stories told to us by our grandparents.

Sure, there's a divide-- but it's located in every state, every municipality, every block, and (I would hazard a guess) every household. The choices as I see it are either maintaining unity, or approximately 281 million different flags flying within the continental U.S.

[redqueen]

96. That 281 million flags...

do you mean anarchy?

That'd be... interesting.

[LanternWaste]

111. Yeah-- I wasn't thinking of that word...

Yeah, anarchy-- I wasn't thinking of that word, but I suppose it would pretty well describe what the situation would devolve into.

[lonestarnot]

182. Boiled sugar becomes syrup.

[depakid]

87. Think Byzantium in the 6th and 7th Centuries

The empire was no longer sustainable in it's complex and centralized form- essentially, it was facing declining and even marginal returns on "complexity"

Through simplification and regional and local integration the economy developed into its medieval form, organized around self-sufficient manors. The peasant soldiers became producers rather than consumers of the empire’s wealth.

The Empire eventually rejuvenated.

Quite a success story, actually.

[Yupster]

167. I think our national identidy is much stronger

than it was for the first 100 years of our nation.

Things like TV and highways have gotten us much clsoer together than we ever were before. Even regional accents are much smaller than they used to be, and every region has large percentages of people who grew up in other regions.

I just don't see anything in the OP's thesis.

[Trillo]

198. Curiously, the same time period you mention,

specifically after ~100 of the first years, represents the loss of the rights of individuals, the rise of corporatism, and in turn brings us to the current point, the open enslavement of all -- where disposable dollars each day either buys your freedom, or it doesn't -- the latter being the case for most all except the upper few percent.

I looked at the wikipedia map, and my initial impression was that the areas wouldn't practically divide up that way because of co-dependencies that exist, and will always exist within the reality of our cooperative nature of survival.

However, the political divides that there are in the media at times represent real philosophical differences, and at other times, most times even, seem to be over-hyped differences played upon by our rulers using the corporate-owned media, as well as the misuse of the Legislative Branch by entrenched interests which artificially divide us. It's still hard to discover all of these, as emotions do run deep.

[niyad]

41. michigan wouldn't have to worry about "crazy californians"?? meaning WHAT, exactly?

and what would be solved, exactly? and how, exactly?

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. Look at the stereotypes perpetuated

and you tell me

[niyad]

49. nice try--YOU are the one who started this discusssion, YOU TELL ME what you think is going

to be solved and HOW. it isn't up to ME, but YOU, to defend and explain your thesis.

and to what stereotypes, specifically, and from whom, do you refer?

as a STUDENT of history, you should be able to answer these questions completely and easily.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. Well my thesis is that this country is no longer a country

and tha we have gathering clouds of a hot civil war

And taht we have been at COLD civil war for a while now

HISTORIANS who understand this realize that nations on this tract go into a HOT CIVIL WAR

And that identification as a nation, in this case AMERICANS, is no longer there

So the question is, do you want the break up to be peaceful or violent?

Your choice

[niyad]

62. you know, capitalizing HISTORIANS and the other words does not make or prove

your thesis, nor does it answer my questions--WHAT EXACTLY did you mean about michigan and crazy californians, and how EXACTLY do you think that dissolution is going to solve anything?

do try, please, to actually answer the questions, and stop using caps as some sort of validating authority. I know the trick and it doesn't work.

it isn't me who needs to answer a question, but YOU (this cap is for emphasis, not validation)

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. Go to GD and find posts by a fellow michiganer I am guessing

and he ain't alome

[niyad]

75. I see, you can't answer the questions posed on your own. and you didn't

respond to the point about validation.

you have now shown exactly whaqt your post is worth in time and trouble.

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. You're opinion that is fine

by the way the BOOK I refered to was written by a sociologist

And it is the first... of many other studies that have come over the years.

As I said, your opinion that is fine

I asked a serious question

You engage in personal atacks that is fine.

Have a good day

:-)

[nadinbrzezinski]

67. Go to GD and find posts by a fellow michiganer I am guessing

and he ain't alome

[Tyler Durden]

79. I didn't advocate secession: I HUMBLY said I didn't understand.

For that I got barbecued. It was if in trying to explain MY character defect, I was told, "YEAH? WELL FUCK YOU TOO."

The first hostile shot was not mine: I was trying to explain a possible underlying cause for a FEW people to be less than completely compassionate.

The whole post was ALMOST an apology. See what it got me. See what it's getting me NOW.

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. And it is not only you that does not understand people

outside your region

This is perfect recipe for nations to break up under certain conditions

We are no longer members of an identified nation, but smaller communities, in this case states

Thank you for reminding me why that book applies today...

[leftofthedial]

35. I don't think the fault lines of disunion

are primarily geographic

the strongest motivators for civil war are class-based

that is why the oligarchs invest so much in constantly driving wedges into the lower classes

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. THey are economic and even ethnic at this point

and you saw them glaringly this week

Ah class war... we barely knew you

[John Q. Citizen]

88. Mexico has a far greater chance of breaking up than we do. So does Canada.

There is no part of our country that has a consensus to break off.

All you have seen is some posters who want to blame their problems on people who live far away.

While kind of silly, and stupid, that doesn't translate into regional conflict. I live in Montana, and there are some who "hate " "Californians" for driving up housing costs, etc, but it's not particularly anything more than something to bitch about.

I grew up on the West Coast of CA, and at the time there was the "Valley go home, they are stealing our waves" sentiment, which is probably still there. But it's just basically something to bitch about.

I don't see anymore of this now, anywhere, than I did 30 years ago. It's still the same old same old.

Montanans joke about succeeding with Alberta and forming our own country. We would have a 5th of the wheat growing land in the world, the head waters of the Mississippi(Missouri River) and the Headwaters of the Columbia, (Clark and Columbia) and all those ICBMs in the missle silos around Graet Falls, but nobody believes it, it's just something to pass the time of day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. I truly fear those divisions are actually increasing

it's been done by design... but they might be reaching a point of going hot.

As to Mexico... it has its issues... don't get me wrong, and they are serious

But the US has serious issues and serious division

[John Q. Citizen]

95. Mexico has far more division. Look at the indigenous areas like Oaxaca,

Chiapas, and the back country in Guerrero. They truely are like another country.

i don't see evidence of serious regional divisions in the US. Normal bitching yes, but there is no consensus from leaders, media, or grassroots about splitting up.

There is no motivating factors in terms of economics, religion, ethnicity, language, or any major political issues that are regionally motivated.

_Do you have any examples, besides day to day bitching, of deep divisions?

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Yes, they do

and the Caste Wars of the Yucatan were nothing to laugh about (and there is an active war there, and has been for now decades)

But... you knew that was comming

Deep Apalachia looks like another country as well

and that is just one example

[John Q. Citizen]

99. But Deep Apalachia isn't talking about succesion. The inner city looks like another

country compared to the Central West Coast or Montana also, but no one anywhere is seriously considering succession.

Unlike, say, indigenous Mexico, or Quebec.

I just don't see it, and I think it's the kind of thing I would see coming if it were bubbling around.

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. I see the signs of a civil war in this country

they are very subtle

But they are there

And as to the nation breaking up, becuase of those signs, when the empire breaks down... it will happen, probably fast

By the way... I hope I am wrong... since these situations are far from clean

[melody]

178. At this point, I don't think so -- there's too much unanimity regarding President Sluggo

With the economic problems to come, I think we'll see more of a cohesiveness, but I still think California and the northwest states breaking off is a virtual certainty. If the rest of the country keeps dragging them to the right, I don't see how it benefits anyone to stay as part of the union.

[sadiesworld]

185. How is the rest of the country dragging

CA to the right?

[melody]

187. That was overstatement to make a point ... obviously I only mean very red states

California is in the best position to break off. That said, the Canadian border states, east coast, northwest and west coast could all combine into a nicely blue region. That way, we'd have Utah surrounded. (This is a joke, this is only a joke)

But I didn't mean the rest of the country, just the red rest of the country.

[melody]

120. Deep Appalachia .. as in US southern Appalachia ... has always been more liberal

Secession is still discussed there, but not to any great extent. The region was neutral during the US Civil War.

[Oak2004]

193. Here in Vermont, the idea is taken quite seriously

and I would not be surprised if a majority, or nearly so, would support it if they thought it was practical (nobody has polled on that, to my knowledge, but they've polled on straight-out support, and that figure is roughly 15% of Vermonters).

While I'm not, myself, a committed 15%-ish supporter, I see the storm clouds on the horizon, and I think Vermont's very best option may be to go its own way. We have a kind of state "patriotism" and internal cohesion that you don't see in most states. If all hell broke loose (as I fear it may in the next years to decades), we could maintain order and civil society by simply raising the flag of the Republic, and moving on.

(Utter aside to nadinbrzezinski : do I remember seeing you post somewhere that you've got an EM background? If so no wonder we're seeing some of the same worrying trends -- we've got similar backgrounds in terms of knowledge (history and emergency management) (though I've not watched a country fall apart in person, as I believe you have).)

[Bucky]

52. Point by point, how you are wrong.

the gathering clouds are there... the storm is getting darker and darker

American Idol.

And imperial contraction leads to serious problems...

Expanding corporate power that may limit goverment by the majority, but has an economic investment in keeping the nation unified, happy, and uninvolved in their own government (at which it's succeeding)

Imperial contraction is starting

Hogwash

And the economy is about to collapse

Past recessions have not led to secessions. This one won't either.

The recipee for disolution is there

No, the recipe for an economic downturn is there.

So yes things are potentially that bad

Repeat: American Idol. You should learn what people care about most.

And I posed this as a very seriious question

About which you have not thought through the obvious answers. People are basically content, so no dissolution is impending.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

86. it is not only regional political differences, or cultural wars,

there are other issues that will magnify those potential fractures.

Being in the midwest, we are kinda muddle of the road. But we have the great lakes, and with all that water, I can see some major future problems, particularly with the deep south. It is not in our (or our ecology) interest to supply huge amounts of water to supply Atlanta, et al. It would eventually ruin the great lakes and cause even more ecological damage. But, there clearly needs to be some fix, because 5 million people cannot drink dry sand or clay. Are there cultural differences between the midwest and south, you betcha. Some are good, some not so good. Southerners think of us in some bigotted terms, and many midwesterners are happy to return the favor.

It is not at the Sunni Shia level, but it can easily grow. But take those problems and add a severe drought, and dire conditions in the south, and I can see some violence grow in the future.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. As I said down thread

water wars will play a role in this

You are pointing to one front

Let me offer you the West...

Won't be fun, but that is clearly one area that will only increase the troubles, as it were

[Sanity Claws]

14. Corporatists would probably hate the break up

Right now, they only have to bribe one set of lawmakers in D.C. If broken up into 9 areas, they would have to spend money to control 9 different sets of government.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. It goes against the trend of a single norht american guv'ment

it will also break the fascist trend in some of these regions... but enhance it in others

[redqueen]

19. No they don't.

Due to the WTO/NAFTA and other such agreements, they trump local governments... and not just in the US.

[melody]

189. They'd have greater results out of regions with which they are in concert though

They'd get more done.

[Selatius]

2. I think it won't end in secession but rather simply dissolving the central government.

Secession implies a small piece breaking off from the whole. No, what I'm suggesting is when the US breaks apart, it likely will mean all the pieces breaking off at the same time. This is how the Soviet Union ended, and it largely ended peacefully, not in some horrific, epic civil war.

[SteppingRazor]

6. Apples and oranges, though.

The Soviet Union had, at one time, been separate nations, so it was easy (relatively speaking) to go back to that when the union broke up.

[Selatius]

30. True, but any break-up would likely be due to economic factors. The Civil War is an example.

The big economic issue of the day was slavery, but that just also happened to be a big social issue at the same time. The way the US ends is when the situation gets so bad that regions of the country come to the conclusion over a period of time that they'd be better off fending for themselves than sinking with the Titanic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. I'm thinking the Soviet scenario is mostly possible

but I do fear some shooting

;-)

[martymar64]

153. I agree

Once the momentum for dissolution builds, it will happen. But some areas, such as the Mtn West and SW will get ugly due to water conflicts, and I fear the deep South will experience racial problems as Jim Crow rears its ugly head again.

[depakid]

93. And there will come a time- perhaps not too long from now

when it will be in the best interests of states in certain regions- perhaps even parts of states- to form regional ties, because (as with the Soviet Union) the increasingly dysfunctional centralized government in Washington will be weighing too heavily on their economic viability and prevailing social values.

For a variety of reasons, the 2020's aren't going to be like the 1930's.

[Tesha]

143. This is already happening.

Here in New England, we enforce California-styled automobile
air pollution regulations and the Federal Government is fighting
agains us. Apparently, "States' Rights" only applies when you're
doing something the Reich Wing approves of.

Tesha

[Selatius]

155. I used to live in Massachusetts coincidentally, Salem to be exact.

I miss that place. When I was in 5th grade, my mother took us and moved to Mississippi to start life over after the divorce. She worked in the fledgling casino industry down there on the Mississippi coast. Comparing the two states is almost like comparing two countries. Aside from calling Washington, D.C., the capital, there's little else in common. Their economies are different, and there are tremendously vast differences as far as social views. They have nothing in common in that area, nothing.

[Tesha]

3. I've spoken here often in favor of that breakup and I've often cited that book...

I've spoken here often in favor of that breakup and
I've often cited that book as still being a very
accurate depiction of why it's inevitable.

Tesha

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Oh that book has been used

for fiction

that aside, I think it is coming... faster than a freight train

And the lack of empathy for americans from different regions tells me we are going there

[SteppingRazor]

4. I don't see how you get to a peaceful breakup.

The nine nations thing covered in that wikipedia article is severely constrained by reality. For example (and this is just one small example), I'd love to see South Florida merge peacefully with Cuba.

But besides political problems, I don't think it's possible to divide the resources equitably without squabbles.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. That is where the shooting comes

especially over sily things like water... in a global warming environment

[SteppingRazor]

21. Even leaving aside natural resources, what about moneymaking economies?

For example, Las Vegas is right on the border between Mexamerica and The Empty Quarter. Would Mexamerica let Empty have Vegas, or try to claim it for Mexamerica?

Anyway, point being, there's a whole mess of problems that prevent a peaceful breakup of this nation and, in the long run, we're probably better off together anyway.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Do we have an identification as AMERICANS?

And yes Vegas is there... but with global warming Vegas will not be there forever

The break up will be far from peaceful, but I fear it is comming.

And the divisions will be fun... you have some states (California) that are economies by themselves, and regions in the US that have been historically depresed and remain depressed and will become third world countries, essentially

[Xithras]

43. I don't think Empty would want Vegas.

In my experience, most Nevadan's outside of Clark county despise the city. A person living in Carson City or Elko has more in common with someone living in Helena Montana or Spokane than they do with someone in Las Vegas. The economies aren't all that compatible either.

[Xenotime]

5. Washington DC should just separate. that would solve a lot of problems.

[Ganja Ninja]

10. I favor a break up.

Give the fundies their own country so they can be as backward and repressive as they want to be.

[NeedleCast]

50. Problem with that is the Fundies

are not really located in one geographic area. I know the red states in the south are often associated with fundies, but I'd suggest that people who think this are not very well traveled. You find fundies everywhere. Upstate New York. Pennsylvania. Rural Ohio. Colorado. Everywhere.

[John Q. Citizen]

90. Religion is dying out. There are revivals, but each revival is smaller than the last.

Our current one is probably millenium driven, but it's now declining as well.

Western Europe, once a hot bed of religious ferver, is becoming secular at a fast rate.

Church attendance in the US has been declining for a long time.

[spoony]

180. Lol, yeah keep telling yourself that

[Fovea]

12. I agree.

I think that we have crossed a threshold that will be too hard to return across and sustain the status quo.

And since the corporatocracy would have to spend 9X the amount of resources, they would lose power to the citizenry.

Also, the Jesusland regions would be able to remain holy, without the need to sniff the panties of the rest for signs of impure thoughts.

[madokie]

13. of course not

In the end America will be stronger for this storm we are now in, ie the bushies

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. I fear it goes beyond the Bush Crime family

and they have just accelerated the process... unwitingly mind you, but they have

[fenriswolf]

16. yeah i dont see it

as california is the biggest cash cow for the united states I doubt anyone would want to seperate themselves.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. I'm all for it. It would be nice to live in a "2nd rate" power.

I also think it's inevitable. But, not in the near future.

[terisan]

23. A looser federation might work. Breaking up the mega states world wide seems to be trend.

China may also start coming apart.

The regions have to be able to work together on some things --nuclear maintenance, climate issues, regional resources. (Watch for example Gov Perdue of georgia attacking his co-region states over water rights.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. The water wars will be a driving force of this

Hell if you think Georgia and Alabama are fun, the comming water wars in the West will be even more fun

[terisan]

57. Yes the western water wars will be big; Georgia can get by on half its annual non-drought rainfall

just by getting serious about conservation.

[kineneb]

94. Cadillac Desert- rec. reading n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

130. Critical readying actually

I still remember when the book came out and folks laughed at it for being... alarmist

[SidDithers]

25. Maybe, but leave Canada out of it...nt

Sid

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. That book is an example

in my view both Canada and Mexico will stay out of it, and the US will break into anywhere from three to five successor states

[SidDithers]

33. Gotcha...

regardless, it's an interesting scenario.

Sid

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. If it comes to it

Hopefully you will only watch it over CBC and pull up your legs...

And Canada (and Mexico) will only have to put troops on border to keep it peaceful on your side of border

[melody]

54. Why would Canada even come "into it"? n/t

[Tesha]

144. Well, for one, because New England has far more in common with the Atlantic Provinces...

Well, for one, because New England has far more in common with the
Atlantic Provinces than we do with, say Dixie, or probably even "the
breadbasket".

Tesha

[melody]

199. All the US/Canadian border states have more in common with each other than their other regions

The same thing with British Columbia and the west coast, for instance.

But a US break-up wouldn't even involve Canada. That would be down the line, if individual states wanted to make their
own unions.

[amandabeech]

191. To accept seceding or orphan states into the Canada as provinces?

I'm originally from Michigan, too, and we fit better with Ontario ecologically and economically. Culturally, we're different, but we're different from Georgia, Texas and California, too. Our governor is from Canada, originally, after all.

Maybe you Canadians have a good solution to Detroit's problems.

[Xithras]

59. I don't think Canada CAN stay out of it.

If the United States breaks up you can expect that to inflame and galvanize the Quebec secessionists. Alberta has slowly been building a movement for more autonomy...or even outright secession...over the last couple of decades as well, and if Quebec leaves it could very well end up with them and other Canadian territories leaving with them.

Mexico is a country that already has severe internal divisions and outright civil war in some parts. That too would erupt.

Look at the fall of the iron curtain in 1999. A huge number of people were unhappy in their countries, but had consigned themselves to its existence. They feared the military, and didn't think it possible to overthrow their governments.

Then Poland did it. The people of Poland ended their dictatorial government. Inspired by their neighbors, the Hungarians rose up and did the same thing. Seeing that, the East German government was crushed by government sentiment, and the Berlin wall fell. Then the Czechs, emboldened by the Germans, poured out into the streets and forced their government down. Then Bulgaria, Romania, and eventually Yugoslavia.

These things have a way of spreading, and you can BET that any dissolution of the United States would spill over and ignite the secessionist movements in Canada and Mexico. My bet is that the entire continent would end up looking very different by the time it was all over. I can see Mexico breaking into at least three nations, with its northern nation including parts of the southwestern US, and Canada breaking into two or three as well. Without some serious military action, I don't see how those nations CAN hold themselves together.

[Blue_In_AK]

26. I think I would move the northern edge of "Ecotopia"

a little further north, because this appears to cut off Anchorage from its bedroom communities in the Mat-Su Valley, which looks like its been relegated to the dread "Empty Quarter." Fairbanks can be in the Empty Quarter, though -- that's okay. :evilgrin:

[shadowknows69]

28. I'd hope we wouldn't break things down ethnically

We can't have fallen so far have we? I know people and have friends of all races and creeds that I don't want to have to have a passport to see. You know me though Nadin I'm a doomer and gloomer lately. I agree something has to happen or the course of this country is a dead end. The world won't suffer us fools much longer either. We should be leading things like Kyoto and human rights and instead we're now an international joke in these areas and more. We have too many nukes? Someone will take us down by a bug. I'd much rather we solve our own problems but the options for that are getting slim and scary.

[Clark2008]

32. Not unless we can afford to pay the 42 percent of us

Southerners who didn't vote for Republicans to move - no.

Or unless they could find me an appropriate place to move.

I, for one, don't want to leave East Tennessee. I like having four seasons, I don't have to worry much about tornadoes and never about hurricanes. There may be an occasional drought or flood, but, all-in-all, it's pretty habitable here - the worst part is dealing with Republicans, but I live in a Democratic enclave within the city. :)

[amandabeech]

192. Well, ethnic cleansing is happening in Iraq,

and it did happen in the former Yugoslavia.

I don't think that we're so different, although I don't think that it will come to that.

[villager]

34. absolutely yes -- it will happen anyway

as the economy devolves, and the central government is less able to do/provide anything as resources run out...

People will re-organize around village/watershed/region, etc., for food growing/trade purposes...

This won't really get underway 'til closer to mid-century, I think...

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. I think closer than mid century

as I said what will drive it is the collapse of Empire, in that sense similar to the former USSR...

One thing for sure, unless I die in the next five to ten years, I won't die in the US... but a Successor state

[villager]

68. or as Michael Ventura sets it out in his column:

"In possessions, they appeared wealthy. In fact, measured by the extent of their debt, their net worth was much less than zero.

When climate change became too disruptive to ignore, two consequences felled this country: Its speculative economy lost much of its "paper" wealth and could not shift in time back to the commerce of necessities that the crisis required, while its lender nations needed all their resources just to cope – leaving the former United States too broke to meet the crisis. Its central government became irrelevant, able only to decree, but unable to act. Gradually, region by region, people began to realize that they were on their own..."

<snip>

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/column?oid=oid%3A549268

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. I'll have to read that later, thanks

[Mrs. Overall]

37. Ecotopia, ironically, would have the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world--

Bangor Submarine Base on Hood Canal in Western Washington. One third of all the world's nuclear weapons are housed there.

On Edit: So don't f*ck with the Ecotopians, man.

[Tyler Durden]

80. Think DC would let you KEEP them?

This is all pretty stupid.

[Mrs. Overall]

163. Ummm, no, so don't get your panties in a wad.

I'm not taking this thread seriously at all--merely pointing out something I consider ironic.

[Tyler Durden]

170. been a bad week.

consider them unwadded.

[Mrs. Overall]

177. Seems like it's been a stressful week for a lot of people here on DU--

Hope things are going better.

[Mme. Defarge]

159. The Mouse that Roared!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mouse_That_Roared

We could call ourselves the Duchy of Grand Fenwick!

[Mrs. Overall]

164. Yes! I forgot about "The Mouse"!

[Arugula Latte]

39. Ecotopia, Ecotopia Uber Alles!

:woohoo:

[The2ndWheel]

44. Why stop at 9?

I say a few hundred. Hell, a few thousand.

Then again, any centralized organization needs resources(the bigger the organization, the more resources it needs). So we'd still have conflicts and wars, these much closer to home. Until the results of those conflicts and wars bring about a center of power large enough to reach further around the world, after assimilating everything into one organization at home.

Wait...that's where we are today...

Damn it, we're not getting out of this thing alive. We're pretty much destined to go up and down again and again, while spinning and flipping around at the same time. That's existence for ya.

[CJCRANE]

45. How do you think the nascent North American Union

will affect these trends?

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. The best laid plans of mice and men

purely

[NeedleCast]

46. No

n/t

[Bucky]

48. Expecting Americans to get involved in civil war now is delusional. Most don't even vote

It's hard to imagine that a nation of people who won't even educate themselves about political issues or bother to vote would somehow be motivated to go out and fight for secession from a well-armed and economically integrated nation-state. How many families are you talking about splitting up here, anyway. This suggestion doesn't even approach reality.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Three to five economies

As to people getting involved... most civil wars are started by MINORITIES, and those who get involved are forced by circumstnace to pick sides

[John Q. Citizen]

98. But who is pissed off at who? For every post here trying to denegrate

So CA as rich yuppies, there were three calling bullshit.

[Bucky]

102. While these are valid principles, the specifics in the US don't match up to them

Sure, the active few always trigger the conflicts that involve the larger community. The problem is that most civil wars are started by minorities that dominate a region within a country. We have polarization in this country, but it's not geographic. Our divisions are within communities--suburban vs urban vs rural; downtown business establishment vs organized labor; Christian fundies vs immigrants & "liberal elites." We don't have a Kurdish sector or a Sunni Triangle (or even a "Dixie" as it stood before the US Civil War).

And sure, we have some distinct regional trends within the country, but I don't think you could name one where the economy is so distinct that it would lead to a civil war. You yourself can't even specify if it's three or five. If things were so dire that a war was imminent, I think they'd be clear enough that you could actually count the players.

Who would secede? The West from the rest of the country? New England? The Northeast? Indiana? About the closest you could come to a plausible secessionist movement in this country would be a big what-if about Alaska if we suddenly had a big-brother big-government president trying to stop the mining/drilling economy. Even then, the big fat cat corporations that weild all the power in Alaska would see the greater advantage in staying with the country at large, so the people would be stymied. Can you think of any plausible scenario where the state & community leaders would support splitting up the country? I can't.

We have a general population that is content and uninvolved. They would stay uninvolved even if a vocal minority with a lot of power within a region decided to seek autonomy. People with power and influence generally understand that they have more power being within a large powerful country, even if that involves compromises. We have no serious or respected leaders calling for secession or even regional autonomy.

We have some pissed off people, but they are marginalized. So that alone does not lead to a segmentation of the country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

132. I'll point out neither could people in 1850

and that is the problem with this

As to distinct economies

Here are you are your economies

Maritimes... yep the east cost

The South... all the way to Texas

The Midwest

The Rockies

The West.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

181. With enough time

and enough immigration we might see immigrant groups in the southwest fight for autonomy. If that happens, hispanic immigrants living in other regions might join them in the southwest, but I think the country - as a whole - would have spiral much farther downward for that to happen, though. I don't really see this happening, but if one region was going to separate, it would be the southwest.

MEChA Read about their Reconquista plan.

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/00W/chicano101-1/aztlan.htm

(I want to see how long it's going to take for someone to accuse me of racism for pointing out this radical, seditionist organization.)

[melody]

58. The majority never participates in border conflicts

They live around it.

We're in the midst of a cold civil war right now by design.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. Correct and thank you for getting it

problem is cold civil wars lead to hot wars sooner or later

[Bucky]

107. What is a "cold civil war"? And if it's "by design", who designed it?

I agree we have nonviolent hostilities, but they are far sharper on the internet than in the community. We have regional disdain for each other, but no real community leaders who seriously think about or economic interests who could benefit from splitting the country either politically or economically. Any players who would suggest something like that in a country where the TV watching masses are generally content, and where the public holds contempt for those who want to rock the boat, would automatically marginalize themselves.

The design may be to keep the masses lined up and disempowered, but that in itself tells us how unlikely it is that any competant designer would seek to split the country up.

Maybe we're thinking of different specifics. Can you suggest any likely scenarios in which the country could lose a region through civil war? Or a scenario in which armed factions inside the country were to begin actually fighting?

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. Cold civil wars are the

radicalization of language

And who has done it? Those who benefit from keeping a population divided

We have to ask whether this is what they intended or we are talking of the law of uninteded consequences

Oh and it is sharper in some regions... but it is there, in the substrata

[Bucky]

125. Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "Can you suggest any likely scenarios?"

I meant, "Are there any supporting details behind your gloom and doom generalities?"

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Yes, here are some signs of this

all them bombings of the clinics... are signs

The disdain of folks from one region to anither... is a sign

The talk in both right and left radio, for the moment chiefly right, that it is time to take matters into their own hands (code word for taking up arms) is a sign. I can mention shows, Savage, Rush, and at times O'Lielly... and yes they are influential... on the left, we had some callers mention in passing the R word in the shultz show... as well as Hartmann.. Those are sign posts

When we had the militias starting to mobilize to rescue a brain dead woman in florida, that was a sign post.

The fact that since '94 you don't have people in congress talk to each other is a sing post (in fact the last time that happened was in the 1840s and 1850s... you do know what happened in 1860, don't you?)

The radicalization of language in both the media and among citizens and that we cannot talk to others on the other side... is another sing post. again read about the country starting in the 1820s with the Missouri Compromise

This is the problem... most folks, if you asked them, in oh 1850 if there was going to be a civil war ten years later... they would have laughed at you...

I could give examples of how Yugoslavia broke apart

I could give you examples of the process in the USSR

The process is similar when it happens, and it is happening here.

[melody]

118. I live in what used to be a red town -- the divide is real

My Republican neighbors wouldn't speak to us for years, at least until they started hating Bush.
My car with the "Keep Abortion Safe and Legal" bumpersticker would get egged. We were threatened with a gun at one point. My uncle (a fundamentalist Christian who lives in Texas) keeps sending me email about the "coming civil conflict".

By "design", I mean the social engineers that descended through the Crowned Heads of Europe and then contaminated the US through the Bush family. I laugh hysterically at people who sneer at "conspiracy theories" about such things ... clearly they haven't read about the relocating of thousands of Scots into northern Ireland (partly to "humanize the Irish" ... as if they needed it) and various other such mass civil engineering schemes including the destruction of US Appalachian mountain communities.

These people have been trying to fracture the US since our inception. Bush is one of them.

[Fovea]

126. Who designed it?

In the end, Kevin Phillips, Roger Ailes, Lee Attwater, Karl Rove.

[melody]

179. Nope, much older than that -- imho, this goes back easily fifty years

Even before that. Bush was put in place to break us up and drive the country into the ground.

[SujiwanKenobee]

55. Nothing new--The regions have been different from the beginning

The people who came to this country initially and who set a stamp on the different regions (New England, the South, Mid-Atlantic, Appalachia) and their descendants who fanned out into the frontier were significantly different and could hardly tolerate one another. Read the travelogues. Each was only too happy to have little to do with the other regions. Despite *most* coming from the British Isles--they may as well have come from totally different countries with different customs, values and speech ways. It's just even more complicated today with so many other national groups that have become part of the mix.

[KamaAina]

56. Garreau refers to NOLA as an "aberration"

along with NYC, DC, and yes, Hawai'i. If I can get to DC, I'll have lived in all four!

The way I'd do it would be to extend the border of "The Islands" (S. Fla. and Caribbean) north into the Gulf and across NOLA, making it a border town (his usage) betwen The Islands and Dixie. NOLA is sometimes called "The Northern Capital of the Caribbean".

[melody]

63. California will break away in the relative near future

We shouldn't have to shoulder the tax burden of citizens who hate us. We can then have a government that doesn't make us all want to puke. The most conservative Californian would be a moderate anywhere else.

I hope we break-off along with Oregon and Washington. I think the three states would make a wonderful, visionary nation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Don't know bout the conservative part

Darryl Issa is an Ass

There I said it

;-)

And to be honest the breakup will not start in Cali, but in Dixie... but will spread FAST

Just an observation

[melody]

74. The supposed "conservatives" are vastly outnumbered

Two years ago, I'd have agreed with your thesis. Now, I think there's such an awakening against the
last thirty years of pseudo-conservative thought that we'll see a settling back under a Clinton regime.

It'll still be way too far to the right for Californians and the northwest, though.

[Q3JR4]

73. Would work for me,

If I could find work there, I'd move.

Q3JR4

[tjwash]

76. That would last right about until Colorado turned off the water.

nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. And that is why Colorado is included in many of the maps

that people have proposed...

If you can get it, the ancient Shadowrun maps (circal late 1980s) may be more accurate.

[melody]

85. Colorado needs our money more than we need their water

We have a vast potential reservoir ... and enough money to make it work. lol

[Blue_In_AK]

92. Can Alaska join you?

Either that, or I want to be part of Canada.

[martymar64]

158. I'm with you on that!

Hail California /Cascadia! We can make San Francisco the National Capitol.

[melody]

188. I'm a great believer in Cascadia. I think we could do great good as a sovereign nation n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

64. If there's a secession, I want to go where there's no freakin' fundies, no anti-global warming

FREAKS. NO pollution loving MORANS, no SUVs, no REPUKES ALLOWED>>>>EVER!!!!!@#$%^ No warmongers, No guns, no big oil companies, no corporate fascists and only PEACE LOVING people are welcome. ONLY alternative fuel vehicles, BIO-DIESEL available for everyone, Organic food only, no poisonous imports from foreign lands, immigrants welcomed, and civil liberties provided by the Constitution that WE TAKE WITH US. THEN, build a huge freakin' wall to keep the RW wacko, nut job fundies OUT. Sounds a little like the communes of old, doesn't it?:loveya:

I'm ready. I'm sick of these people. I can't even be civil to them anymore. I'm at the end of my rope.

[mitchum]

69. I always find this to be the "liberal" equivalent of right wing rapture wishful thinking...

and it's equally realistic

[KittyWampus]

70. I think it just makes some DU'ers feel smarter posting sentiments like this. Meanwhile,

the notion that 'whole regions hate each other' is a fiction with no EMPIRICAL supporting evidence.

Just some ancedotes from likeminded DU'ers picking up some stray comment from an idiot they came across.

Or some snide comment made by a Mediawhore PAID to create certain impressions.

It's ironic, DU'ers pretend to be so very smart and yet are rubes when it comes to buying fallacious ideas.

For the most part, I've come to see DU largely just a website where liberals come to have a pissing match over how smart they are.

Note- opening poster seems to enjoy throwing the phrase "hot civil war" around.

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. The book I cited is based on sociological research

not on rubes in this place

And that is NOT the only study done

[renie408]

106. The 'book' you quoted was Wikipedia.

You quoted a Wiki article ABOUT a book. A 27 year old book. I bet if I get to cruising around Wikipedia, I can find a book written within the past 27 years that says...oh, crap...I can't think of anything as silly as breaking the country into nine separate nations.

[nadinbrzezinski]

115. that was the FIRST reference that came up

wiki is that way.

It has the map

But that is not the only study done

[melody]

82. Calling people "rubes" and "idiots" instead of presenting counter arguments is smart?

You obviously don't know much about history and nation-building. While I disagree that the whole country
will break-up, I do think we'll see splintering. To say otherwise is like the global warming deniers sitting
on the porch today saying, "Global warming? Why, it's a beautiful day!"

[piedmont]

129. Best post of the thread. Thank you. nt

[Zookeeper]

81. I think we're at a point where every 21 year old should be....

required to take a cross-country road trip.

Including native Californians. "Everyone" visits California, but what I found when I lived there, was that native Californians rarely saw a reason to travel east of Las Vegas (NYC was an exception). It's that belief that CA is the promised land, so why bother with anyplace else. I knew Californians who thought the upper midwest has snow on the ground all year. :D

That said, every region has it's misunderstandings about other areas. It's depressing how little genuine curiosity Americans have for different regions of our own country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. And that my friend is another marker of nations that

are getting ready to break apart

;-)

[hiphopnation]

100. I like you as a friend, please don't be mad. n/t

[earth mom]

101. Breaking the country up sounds better than the North American Union. nt

[John Q. Citizen]

105. Perhaps, but if you look at the history of humans on the earth, grouping have

gotten larger and more complex.

From hunter gathers, to horticulturalists, to agriculturalists, to insdustrialists, politcal entities have gotten bigger.

Not to mention that for the first time in human existence, more people now live in cities than live in the country side.

The trend isn't toward smaller decentralized, but larger more centralized.

Right now, South America is seriously considering moving towards an economic/cultual union, patterned after the European Union. That's one of the basic underpinnings of the Bolivarian revolution.

So while some places may decentralize, in the bigger picture, the trend is definatly towards larger.

[earth mom]

110. The North American Union is evil. It will kill the Constitution & our way of life. NO thanks. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. So will the break up of the country

successor states are not guaranteed to follow a 230 year old document that most don't understand anyway

[Oak2004]

200. Many states have stronger constitutions than the Federal one

I know I feel my rights are better protected under the Vermont constitution than under the US Constitution.

[John Q. Citizen]

134. I'm not arguing in favor of the NAU. I'm only pointing out that human groupings tend to

get larger and more complex, for better or worse.

That's been the trend since humans existed.

[martymar64]

160. Both trends go simultaneoously in different geographic locations

Centralization may trend in some areas while others are decentralizing. Example: When the Roman Empire fell apart, it decentralized into smaller units. Meanwhile in the middle east around the same time, they were centralizing under Islamic rule and the first caliphate. It grew more complex and became an empire in a few short centuries.

[John Q. Citizen]

166. i'm not saying that decentraization never occurs. I'm saying that the overall

trend is toward larger more complex groups, and that's been happening for a long time.

What was Rome is now a fairly large chunk of the European Common Market.

[martymar64]

168. Technology has facilitated centralization but . . .

But it also relies on reliable resources. In societies that run out of a crucial resource, they tend to decentralize. Plus identity politics also plays a large role in decentralization.

Benjamin Barber's " MacWorld vs. Jihad" is a good thorough overview of these trends and their effects on modern society.

[John Q. Citizen]

169. Very true as to the environmental limits on centralization, as well as the technological

impetus toward centralization.

It's a balancing act in a way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

173. At this point I am thinking of the Diamond's book

and the ecological reasons for empires to fail

[John Q. Citizen]

186. There's some classic examples, the Mayan in the Yucatan, the Cliff Dwellers

in the upper Southwest, the lead in the Roman hydrology probably didn't help a lot in terms of administration. I mean who had plumbing?

I read a book called Rivers of Empire, which is about the history of hydrology in the western US. The guy started out the book with a sort of deep ecology thesis which is that civilizations that practice hydrology often soon become empires, because to maintain the vast system requires a high degree of organization of labor, and a steady feedback of economic input and they also set themselves up for a hierarchical caste system where after a period the ones who know how to operate the water works end up with inordinate control of the resource, and as a result, wealth, power. Its all kind of China town in a way.

He contrasted and compared the Western water experience, the era of dam building,the myth and the reality of the greening of the great American desert through hydrology, with other empires who practiced hydrology, such as Egypt and ancient China, as well as telling a compelling legal, social, and economic history of water in the West.

I've heard Cadillac Desert compared to it in some ways.

As far as the thesis in the OP, given the right conditions, anything is possible. I just don't see the impetus in terms of consciousness yet to dissolve the political unit. In fact , it appears that the powers that be might like to expand the political unit, as mentioned by another poster in terms of the North American Union. I'm skeptical of the political realties of that, at least from the perspective of the inhabitants of all three states. However, attainment of a NAU would be less surprising to me than a dissolution of the US at present.

We are tied together through media. (one of your posited questions) Just as Mexico embarked on an ambitious radio link up in the 50s to be able to blanket the country, we are blanketed by TV, radio, and other tele kinda stuff. Everyday all across the country, somebody watched the same show. That and our shared myths tie us together currently, and the myths seems pretty healthy to me (in terms of being actively commonly shared) for the most part.

[renie408]

103. Is this an article from The Onion? n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

119. No, it is actually a very serious question

but thanks for yer concern

[renie408]

121. Since when? 1981? Does anybody REALLY think that the US is going to

break up into nine separate regions?? And HELLO!!! Everybody that lived in the northeast when this book was written now lives here.

I am sorry. I find this hard to take seriously. Why is it that everybody thinks that RIGHT NOW is the worst thing this country has been through? What about the Civil War? The Depression? WWII? Vietnam? Come on...this country has gone through hard times and will again. NOW isn't the worst. It's just bad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

135. That was the FIRST of a series of books that

have been written as scholarly articles

Again, thank for yer concern

I am sure the Amercians of 1820, with a few exceptions didn't see the civil war of 1860 comming

And very perceptive folks saw the gathering clouds by 1850

They were not taken seriously either... until Kansas exploded...

Then people started to pay a little more attention

And by 1860 it was a given

These processes don't develop overnight

Again, thanks for yer concern

[renie408]

147. I will simply answer your question. No, I don't think the US is on the verge

of splitting into nine separate nations. I think that no matter how much divisiveness there might be, we would work it out as a nation. For one thing, the federal government is much stronger now than it was in 1820 or 1850. States rely on the central government now more than they did 140 years ago.

I am not sure what that whole 'thanks for yer concern' is supposed to convey. I imagine the exact opposite of thanks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

162. First used the book as an example of what is out there

second... you refered to this as the onion...

Third, my personal view, three to five successor states

Fourth, these things are not sudden... they take YEARS, and we are well in the process

Can it be reveresed? Only if we get a NATIONAL leader that can get the trust of folks... you tell me... Giulani is that man? Or is Hillary... or for that matter McCain?

Of all the candidates we have, most of then, save probably Edwards and perhaps Obama (Kucinich if he had a chance) are divisive, and you have to ask WHY... and the other question is Cui Bono?

[Zhade]

104. To me, the question is more like "is it inevitable", regardless of if it should or not.

I know this much - the world this century will not resemble the world of the last, except maybe in terms of suffering.

[End Of The Road]

108. I see secession a bit differently

I think it could be a last resort for getting rid of a tyrannical federal government. If a majority of states (or is it two-thirds) decides to secede and form a new federal government (sans such blatant corruption, one would hope), there would be no bloodshed.

[tabasco]

109. No way is West Virginia part of Dixie.

No freakin' way.

[renie408]

113. Shit. I didn't even check that. We aren't taking Alabama, either. n/t

[tabasco]

122. I live in WV.

No way will I be part of Dixie. That was decided in 1863.

[renie408]

123. ROFL!! I live in Dixie. We don't mind. n/t

[tabasco]

133. On my property is a breastwork,

where West Virginians blew the shit out of Virginians trying to come up the mountain.

They didn't want them bringing giant cockroaches from "Dixie."

[Breeze54]

116. NO!

Once the present asshole administration is out and we clean the clocks

of the turncoat Dems we CAN turn this thing around!!! We've been through

similar BS before, maybe not as bad (debatable), but the future didn't look

so bright back then either but ~~~ WE SURVIVED!!!!! And we will continue!!

Once we have ALL the power back, we need to make haste to pass laws so that

this can NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN!!!!!! :grr:

[TreasonousBastard]

124. This book was written in 1981 when...

we had already come a long way into becoming a more integrated (not entirely in the racial sense) country. Since then we have seen even more massive migrations of population and industry changing more and more of what were "traditional" regional cultures.

I don't see nearly the divisions I saw back in the 60s when travelling through Alabama or parts of Georgia did actually seem like visiting a foreign country. We also don't have the regional battling that we had during the Kansas/Nebraska wars, the Progressive movement, Shays' rebellion, or the Civil War. We have in the past been very close to, if not actually in, wars within ourselves. What's happening now is nothing compared to what Bryan was going on about with his cross of gold.

So, this is simply a diversion, glossing over questions of how the debt, the military, and existing treaties are allocated amongst the new nations. Water and mineral rights, along with ownership of national parks and Puerto Rico have to be dealt with. Embassies for the new countries, Guam, Marshall Islands, the naval base in Diego Garcia... splitting up an empire is not so easy.

And this book talks of including Canada and Mexico in the deal-- fat chance of that ever happening, either.

[piedmont]

127. Hell no.

If this country breaks up, it won't be the ordinary citizens who win. It'll just turn into corporate fiefdoms.

[tammywammy]

131. No n/t

[Marrah_G]

136. It will happen eventually

The social and cultural differences are to great. Frankly I think it's a good idea. We have become to large for one central government. Small regions allow for more input by the people who actually live there. There is nothing worse, in my opinion then trying to have social values from other parts of the country shoved down my throat.

We have become very distinct regions and yes, I think change is coming and in the end it will be for the best.

[hfojvt]

137. that break-up would never work

The nine nations guy has Wisconsin in the same nation as the FIBs. And that's just nucking futs!

Edit: Also, when it comes to hostility, there is nothing quite like that between High School football rivals. People from Sauk-Prairie, Wisconsin absolutely despise people from Baraboo. Same with people from Huron, SD and Mitchell, SD.

[nadinbrzezinski]

139. That was an early study

and references by people who look at this as a serious issue

I personally forsee three to five distinct and separate successor states

[CrispyQ]

138. Looks like it's time to

Get outta Denver better go, go
Get outta Denver better go-ooooh
Get outta Denver better go, go
Get outta Denver cause you like just like a commie
and you might just be a member, better
Get outta Denver, better, get outta Denver

Oh crap. I don't have the funds to re-locate.

on edit: I remember reading some time ago that America is not so much a melting pot of cultures as a patch work quilt. We don't meld, but rather, like stays with like.

[amandabeech]

194. My man, Bob Seger!!!

If you like green lawns and trees, yes, go.

[yasmina27]

140. All we need is another attack

and we'll all be bonded together tighter than with super glue.

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. Them are temporary

(though a real leader would heal some of the divisions)

But I will make the case we are more divided now than we were on September 10th,

:-)

[book_worm]

142. No--this isn't the 1860's and the national govt. can more than keep us in line

with the arsenal of weaponds they have. If you think the Civil War was bloody... think again. Also, I doubt there is a wide number of people who would support secession, unlike in the 1860's. Also, while you may not like the bible belt--there are many fine people who do live there who aren't lunatics.

[Zookeeper]

145. After having looked at that map....

I can't imagine putting Minnesota and Wisconsin in the same "country" as Texas and Oklahoma. I have to wonder if the person who came up with this idea has actually visited these states.

Minnesota and Wisconsin are Great Lakes states. (And Blue.)

See, there's my point again. That's another person who should have taken a road trip. :P

[nadinbrzezinski]

146. He did

that is based on his data

Furhter studies have been done...

[Zookeeper]

149. Well. He's wrong.

Minnesota might have elected pro-wrestler Jesse Ventura, but we never would have elected George W. Bush.

[nadinbrzezinski]

151. You know what concerns me is that he looked at trends back then

and today we see those trends worsening

Are all his details correct? Probably not... should he (and others who have been studying this) be dismissed off hand

But are trends present? I fear yes

By the way I am not sure, but what was the electing pattern in both the 2000 and 2004 elections?

Did they vote for or against George?

(And the election was stolen but that is another story)

On edit, Minnesota Sec of state map

http://www.hamline.edu/~dkirchner01/electionmaps/cities_pres04.html

[NorthernSpy]

148. you are an immigrant to the United States...

nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) I came legally to this country

and you know what... the logisitics of deporting 12 million people make it imposible. I have no problem with them going to the back of the line. realize it took me 12 years to become naturalized... which tells me it will take these folks anywhere from 16-25 years

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2635672#2636182


If you've decided that "this country is no longer a country", and that our identity as Americans is a false identity, then instead of bandying about the fearsome prospect of a Soviet-style bust-up of the only country the rest of us have to call home, why don't you just go back where you came from?

Well my thesis is that this country is no longer a country

and tha we have gathering clouds of a hot civil war

And taht we have been at COLD civil war for a while now

HISTORIANS who understand this realize that nations on this tract go into a HOT CIVIL WAR

And that identification as a nation, in this case AMERICANS, is no longer there

So the question is, do you want the break up to be peaceful or violent?

Your choice

No, the "fake" country you immigrated to, or the one you emigrated from: YOUR choice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

150. and a HISTORIAN by training

but thanks for the flame

[NorthernSpy]

196. it's a reasonable question...

... not a flame.

But thanks for dodging it and continuing to send out feelers on the prospect of breaking up the country that four centuries of my ancestors worked to build and fought to defend. I can't tell you how much that doesn't offend me, really.

[amandabeech]

197. How long have you lived here and where did you receive your training?

I have met other immigrants, legal and illegal, who see no culture here, but many of them have only lived in large cities with large numbers of fairly recent immigrants and many U.S.-born citizens who have no knowledge or respect for more traditional culture. Many of those newcomers seem rarely to mix with those who see that we really have a culture or will admit such beliefs to such immigrants.

I'm from a small town and was born there 52 years ago. IMHO, the traditional culture lives outside these metro areas, but the culture is clearly threatened.

I possess an A.B. in History and wish that I had pursued the Ph.D. I have a law degree instead. Barf. Do you have the Ph.D?

Sometimes visitors or newcomers see a society with different and more critical eyes. The classic work here of that type in my mind would be Tocqueville, and I'm positive that you have read his work. Do you have some material that of that type available so that we could see your arguments?



edit: spelling and grammar check

[agincourt]

152. We need a new constitution,

that deals with the reality of the power elite, imperial corporations, and their endless propaganda on all channels. Our divisions come from power churches backed up by corporations that are way stronger than they should be. Fascism doesn't rise from the streets, it comes from the boardrooms. The Third Reich being an example of big money interests putting who they wanted in power, not knowing the ride they were in for.

[nadinbrzezinski]

154. Correct, my brother and I have been talking about it

and some of its problems

One of them is the two party system, which is by default the only possible result the way it is written... and those thwo will not let the needed reforms...

It has weakneses, but that is beucase it is a product of men, well intentioned men, but it has some problems

[walldude]

171. Isn't that what amendments are for?

I think the authors of the Constitution realized there was no way they could predict the future so they left things open for adjustment and change. I do agree that major changes are required but a "new" Constitution? Not sure.

I also in some ways agree with your OP, however, I think much of the animosity comes from ignorance and a tendency to lump people into groups. You mentioned in the OP people in the bible belt, and in general I would agree but I have met many people in the bible belt who I actually liked. I do the same thing, especially when it comes to religious people, I have a tendency to lump them all in as fundie nut jobs but when I meet them on an individual basis they are much easier to take, even if we disagree on many issues.

[nadinbrzezinski]

174. yes the ammendments are suposed to be for

but in many ways I don't expect the necessary ammendments to come in the near future

The power structure will not let them in

[MasonJar]

156. It may be the only way to save the world. I for one am sick of American hegemony.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

157. You fail to consider

that people on this board probably have stronger opinions than the average American, probably care more, and probably like to debate/argue more, too.

I don't think it's even on most people's radar that they "hate each other." Yeah, there are some stereotyping and prejudices in this country about the people in different regions, but I just don't think that there's a whole lot of "regional" hate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

161. I pointed some of the trends

that are well outside the net

Let me point them to you

Congress critters don't cross party to even have a cup of coffee together after the day is over... since '94

That was Gingrich Dictat

Party line votes have been common since '94

The coarsening of the language... and I do not mean the RW way... but things like time for revolution and we have to take things into our own hands...

The militia movement

And on and on

The markers are there... unfortunately

And here is the other post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2142128&mesg_id=2143957

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

165. Oh, fer gosh sakes, NO!!! The only "very hot" war happening is among the,...

,...MOST wealthy and powerful. We, unfortunately, are merely the territory on which that war is being fought.

Well, of course, we are more than that BUT we aren't really a part of it except as collateral damage.

As an individual who DOES live in the "bible belt" (and still manages quite well as non-religious spiritual person), I would never ever suggest to those I bump into each day: maybe, we should separate because the powers-that-be are bent upon dividing us.

No. I reject your proposition as extreme. However, it does make individuals like Horowitz feel better about his extremist positions.

BAH!!!

Tsk.

[MedleyMisty]

172. Umm - here in the supposed "Bible Belt"

some people are a little upset about everyone moving down here, but overall no one really thinks much about other regions of the country or what they think of us.

Which is why all the South-bashing on here surprises me. I never knew there was any regional hatred until I started posting on left leaning political forums.

The only real life stuff I've got is when my brother moved to New York and got married and we went to the wedding everyone wanted us to talk because they liked our accents and their food was weird and they didn't know how to cook green beans. Oh, and if you ordered tea you had to specify sweet and iced. Heathens. ;)

I know that anecdotes aren't worth much, but really - I just don't see any real ready to secede and make our owm damn country seething hatred other than in occasional posts on political boards.

Now, if you want to talk about an ideological divide...

[nadinbrzezinski]

175. I am talking about the ideological divide actually

and how the trends are for something ugly

[Truthiness Inspector]

176. Quick answer: No.

United we stand, divided we fall (and that means in good times and bad). Anyone who advocates the division of this nation....do the math.

[Politicub]

183. This would never happen

and it's a waste of time even contemplating it.

[cali]

184. more secular apocalyptism from a secular apocalyptist

what a surprise.

nothing but a wiki article to back her up, the op posts yet another secular end-time thesis.

what nonsense.

[renie408]

190. No, she has a series of books to back her up.

Hey, you know that if it is in a book, it must be true.

[Tesha]

202. Do you write things that are deliberately rude?

I'm just wondering, because you don't ever seem to have any
facts to back up *YOUR* side of the argument, yet you mock
others who do bring facts and supported speculation to the
argument.

Tesha

[mvd]

195. No, I don't think it will break up this way

Red states and blue states are even shades of purple. If it gets too bad in this country, there will probably be a lot of relocation, and the U.S. will pretty much be divided on philosophical grounds.

[warren pease]

201. On nations and states...

As I learned it, there's a fundamental difference between nations and states, although the terms are often used interchangeably. A nation is a group of people whose common history, culture and self-identity binds them together, regardless of geography. States are simply political divisions represented as lines on a map.

For example, the Kurds live in at least three countries -- Iraq, Turkey and Iran -- and have no real allegiance to any of them. They do, however, have a strong allegiance to each other, which makes them a nation rather than members of a state.

I think all this has relevance to your post because I would submit that the US is currently a state, not a nation. Nationalism is used to whip the populace into supporting whatever militaristic, xenophobic, imperialist or "free trade" piece of mindless excess the corporate elites and their employees in the white house decide will make them the most money in the shortest period of time.

But it's a phony kind of nationalism in that it has more to do with support for a particular regime or set of ideologies than it does love of country. Nationalism as manifested currently in the US is, I think, more accurately called "state-ism." There are those who fly the flag out of identification with the American creation myth, but they seem significantly outnumbered by those who fly the flag to self-identify as Bushists or pro-war or anti-immigrant or anti-gay or pro-religious nut cases or (insert your favorite wingnut position here).

And many of these are people who accept the controlling power of a warrior state because it validates their personal commitment to violence and aggression. BushCo is the perfect prop for these people, filled as it is by violent liars who ignore the rule of law, dismiss the concept of justice as archaic, are willing to torture people and thumb their collective noses at the entire appalled world community, gleefully embrace corporate imperialism performed by military proxy, and continue the grand American tradition of indiscriminatingly slaughtering little disposable brown people simply because they're things in the way.

Re national self-identity: (Flame retardant: Please note that the following is not meant as a swipe at Dixie, since rednecks infest all corners of the globe.) I have much more in common with people I've met in Canada, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Mexico, Costa Rica and Argentina than I'll ever have in common with the archetypal American redneck -- dull, bigoted, quick to shoot, slow to comprehend, BushBot consciousness, anti-environmentalist, humor dependent on what Rush told him that day... This guy might as well live on the moon (and I wish he did) in terms of my identifying with him as part of my nation.

So does that make me German, Costa Rican, Canadian, Italian or... ? If I use the cohesiveness of nationalism as the yardstick, then that's a reasonable argument. Am I an American? Not if that means I have to be glad that I breathe the same air as that redneck.

And not if that means I'm a state-ist whose nationalism is superseded by allegiance to a government that represents lines on a map. But I am an American if that means holding government to its obligation to the nation: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Ahh... Just idle ramblings on a gorgeous fall day in Baja Canada.


wp

[Yukari Yakumo]

203. In order to trigger a Soviet style collapse, three things need to happen

1. A major economic collapse. Something that would rival the Great Depression in comparison.

2. A major political collapse. Basically, the government ceases to work. In the current environment, it could easily happen as long as the Dems and the RePukes control at least one part of the legislative or executive branch each.

3. A major social collapse. If #1 and #2 happens, then #3 could happen. The current social order would have to be brought down. Currently, the people could care less about anything more distant than 1 foot away from them. In order to trigger a social collapse, something would have to force them to be aware of what's going on.

Another thing that has to happen is a local, state, or cultural identities supercedes a national identity. That is already happening in various parts. i.e. Texas, Utah, and perhaps Vermont.