Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/17/2009 6:06:32 PM EST
Link



* U.S. NEWS
* JUNE 13, 2009

Divided We Stand
What would California look like broken in three? Or a Republic of New England? With the federal government reaching for ever more power, redrawing the map is enticing, says Paul Starobin

By PAUL STAROBIN

Remember that classic Beatles riff of the 1960s: “You say you want a revolution?” Imagine this instead: a devolution. Picture an America that is run not, as now, by a top-heavy Washington autocracy but, in freewheeling style, by an assemblage of largely autonomous regional republics reflecting the eclectic economic and cultural character of the society.

There might be an austere Republic of New England, with a natural strength in higher education and technology; a Caribbean-flavored city-state Republic of Greater Miami, with an anchor in the Latin American economy; and maybe even a Republic of Las Vegas with unfettered license to pursue its ambitions as a global gambling, entertainment and conventioneer destination. California? America’s broke, ill-governed and way-too-big nation-like state might be saved, truly saved, not by an emergency federal bailout, but by a merciful carve-up into a trio of republics that would rely on their own ingenuity in making their connections to the wider world. And while we’re at it, let’s make this project bi-national—economic logic suggests a natural multilingual combination between Greater San Diego and Mexico’s Northern Baja, and, to the Pacific north, between Seattle and Vancouver in a megaregion already dubbed “Cascadia” by economic cartographers.

Devolved America is a vision faithful both to certain postindustrial realities as well as to the pluralistic heart of the American political tradition—a tradition that has been betrayed by the creeping centralization of power in Washington over the decades but may yet reassert itself as an animating spirit for the future. Consider this proposition: America of the 21st century, propelled by currents of modernity that tend to favor the little over the big, may trace a long circle back to the original small-government ideas of the American experiment. The present-day American Goliath may turn out to be a freak of a waning age of politics and economics as conducted on a super-sized scale—too large to make any rational sense in an emerging age of personal empowerment that harks back to the era of the yeoman farmer of America’s early days. The society may find blessed new life, as paradoxical as this may sound, in a return to a smaller form.

[snip]



I wonder why the corporate media is so interested in the breakup of our country.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:08:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 6:08:31 PM EST by marksman121]
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:21:20 PM EST
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:27:23 PM EST
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:28:04 PM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


The current Government will nuke California before they let it split and lose all those electoral votes.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:29:01 PM EST
I put yes... But not exactly like your yes.

More like "Yes- We're Balkanized and saved!"
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:32:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 6:36:14 PM EST by machinisttx]
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


You mean the "Federal $$$" that's stolen from the paychecks of citizens of those states?

Because those states wouldn't simply tax the citizens themselves?



ETA: I'd like to see the libtards and hippies relocated to the states they already have a majority in. Concentrate the non libtards/non hippies in the other states. Form two seperate countries. When the libtard country fails, we roll in, do some exterminating, and have the rest of the states back.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:34:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:35:11 PM EST
I think Balkanization is in our future, just not for a few decades probably.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:35:29 PM EST

Originally Posted By Loki41872:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


The current Government will nuke California before they let it split and lose all those electoral votes.

Win-Win?
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:35:31 PM EST
Originally Posted By MountainMan:
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.


Then go.

North or south, it's up to you.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:38:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By Loki41872:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


The current Government will nuke California before they let it split and lose all those electoral votes.

Win-Win?


Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:41:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By Loki41872:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


The current Government will nuke California before they let it split and lose all those electoral votes.
Win/Win.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:49:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By machinisttx:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


You mean the "Federal $$$" that's stolen from the paychecks of citizens of those states?

Because those states wouldn't simply tax the citizens themselves?



ETA: I'd like to see the libtards and hippies relocated to the states they already have a majority in. Concentrate the non libtards/non hippies in the other states. Form two seperate countries. When the libtard country fails, we roll in, do some exterminating, and have the rest of the states back.


I like the way you think, let's be friends.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:50:59 PM EST
I have heard this BS all my life... probably never happen, and at least not in the next 50 -100 years.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:54:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


This would be great. There would be no change in the House of Reps, as the seats would be divided between the two based on what state got what area. The win would be two new GOP Senators, and a GOP governor. I am sure the Northern Californians would be happy to let the illegals, the hippies, and the liberals have the lower half of CA, along with the chronic budget issues these types run.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:56:48 PM EST
Originally Posted By VaFarmBoy:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


This would be great. There would be no change in the House of Reps, as the seats would be divided between the two based on what state got what area. The win would be two new GOP Senators, and a GOP governor. I am sure the Northern Californians would be happy to let the illegals, the hippies, and the liberals have the lower half of CA, along with the chronic budget issues these types run.


Yup. Going 20 miles North of Sacramento and you leave ALOT of the libs behind.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 6:57:18 PM EST
Originally Posted By VaFarmBoy:
Originally Posted By marksman121:
There is a group of people in Northern CA that want to make a new state. The flag is of a pine tree or something. Its been on the news here before.


This would be great. There would be no change in the House of Reps, as the seats would be divided between the two based on what state got what area. The win would be two new GOP Senators, and a GOP governor. I am sure the Northern Californians would be happy to let the illegals, the hippies, and the liberals have the lower half of CA, along with the chronic budget issues these types run.


I'm in.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:00:19 PM EST
It's not just Northern California. It's also southern Ory-gun. Free State of Jefferson. Live it!
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:04:45 PM EST
Originally Posted By 4v50:
It's not just Northern California. It's also southern Ory-gun. Free State of Jefferson. Live it!


Dude - Liberal crazy shit runs all the way up I5 to Seattle. SFO, Eugene, Salem, Portland, Olympia, Seattle.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:05:51 PM EST
Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I have heard this BS all my life... probably never happen, and at least not in the next 50 -100 years.


I just think it's odd we're starting to see this stuff in the corporate media, it's always been fringe-element stuff (not saying I think it's tinfoil in any way at this point)

Now we also hear the globalist and CFR member Governor Rick Perry talking secession? Is this the same Rick Perry who tried to ram through the Texas portion of the NAU super-highway splitting the state in half by a "free-trade zone" and helping split the country in half as well. Now I'm all for the Texas Republic (disclosure) but it would worry me when an enemy of freedom and a globalist starts pushing that agenda.

We also see and hear from a popular personality like Glenn Beck talking about revolution and secession on a corporate news outlet no less. ... Frankly I doubt he would be on a network like Fox if it didn't fit someone's agenda.

Rupert Murdoch isn't a patriot I assure you.

Those Russian articles about the breakup of the US with Russia taking back Alaska or some rot like that, Aztlan, the Reconquista movement, etc, etc.

Anything that the globalists are promoting has to be a threat for our country, our freedoms, America's sovereignty and it's greatness.

This rant was slightly off-topic but I've been wanting to say something about Rick Perry anyway.

Now we see it in the Wall Street Journal and seems unusual and possibly stunning for something like that to appear just now. Maybe I'm just naive.






Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:12:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:15:27 PM EST
A California divided in 3 would be ideal for the current administration.

4 more liberal senators at the very least.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:22:02 PM EST
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.



We just cut taxes and have a $9 billion surplus for the year. And half the country depends on our natural resources and industry, especially our high-end electronics. Fuck the feds.

Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico are welcome to join the Republic of Texas.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:33:00 PM EST
I'm not a Texan, but I would become one if they'd take me. I'd promise to bring at least a dozen guns. Montana wouldn't be bad either...
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:33:41 PM EST

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.



We just cut taxes and have a $9 billion surplus for the year. And half the country depends on our natural resources and industry, especially our high-end electronics. Fuck the feds.

Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico are welcome to join the Republic of Texas.

Big deal. Utah runs a budget surplus almost every year but that is due to the fact that state agencies get alot of federal grant money. Take it away and you have a deficit. It's the same with Texas; I imagine they get billions of dollars alone in federal highway money.

Oh, and after you make up your Republic of Texas be prepared to have the rest of the US start to tax your exports. If you hated NAFTA and wanted to see it gone you'll get your wish, but you might not like it much.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:37:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.


Whatever you say.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:38:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.


Whatever you say.

What were the results from that poll where they asked Texans if they wanted to leave the US? Something like only 17% in favor of leaving?

QED.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:38:58 PM EST
As far as state budgets and federal money goes....if you did away with the bloated federal budget, you could do away with federal taxes, and people could afford to pay more to their state, and hopefully the state would balance the budget.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:39:17 PM EST
Originally Posted By Terminus:
Link



* U.S. NEWS
* JUNE 13, 2009

Divided We Stand
What would California look like broken in three? Or a Republic of New England? With the federal government reaching for ever more power, redrawing the map is enticing, says Paul Starobin

By PAUL STAROBIN

Remember that classic Beatles riff of the 1960s: “You say you want a revolution?” Imagine this instead: a devolution. Picture an America that is run not, as now, by a top-heavy Washington autocracy but, in freewheeling style, by an assemblage of largely autonomous regional republics reflecting the eclectic economic and cultural character of the society.

There might be an austere Republic of New England, with a natural strength in higher education and technology; a Caribbean-flavored city-state Republic of Greater Miami, with an anchor in the Latin American economy; and maybe even a Republic of Las Vegas with unfettered license to pursue its ambitions as a global gambling, entertainment and conventioneer destination. California? America’s broke, ill-governed and way-too-big nation-like state might be saved, truly saved, not by an emergency federal bailout, but by a merciful carve-up into a trio of republics that would rely on their own ingenuity in making their connections to the wider world. And while we’re at it, let’s make this project bi-national—economic logic suggests a natural multilingual combination between Greater San Diego and Mexico’s Northern Baja, and, to the Pacific north, between Seattle and Vancouver in a megaregion already dubbed “Cascadia” by economic cartographers.

Devolved America is a vision faithful both to certain postindustrial realities as well as to the pluralistic heart of the American political tradition—a tradition that has been betrayed by the creeping centralization of power in Washington over the decades but may yet reassert itself as an animating spirit for the future. Consider this proposition: America of the 21st century, propelled by currents of modernity that tend to favor the little over the big, may trace a long circle back to the original small-government ideas of the American experiment. The present-day American Goliath may turn out to be a freak of a waning age of politics and economics as conducted on a super-sized scale—too large to make any rational sense in an emerging age of personal empowerment that harks back to the era of the yeoman farmer of America’s early days. The society may find blessed new life, as paradoxical as this may sound, in a return to a smaller form.

[snip]



I wonder why the corporate media is so interested in the breakup of our country.



Just think about all the reporting they'll get to do on it.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:44:11 PM EST
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:44:49 PM EST
Poll assumes breakup to be bad.

Sadly, we are probably doomed to be assimilated.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:46:30 PM EST
It’s what I’ve been saying for a while…

There are people who see America as the main obstacle to their plans for a reshaped World. Even when they gain control of the Government and our media, they still can’t fully control the American people. And united we are too big of a power to manipulate economically or to threaten militarily.

So, they put Obama in charge and have him spend the Federal Government into bankruptcy. Then they have their media start prepping us for the collapse of the Federal Government and the breakup of the nation.

I believe their vision would have the United Nations determining the world’s military and foreign policy. Individual regions would control the economic systems (North America, Europe, etc.) And smaller, more localized, states would control the social aspects of government.

All and all it doesn’t sound like a bad system… Except that I know what an unelected oligarchy would ultimately do. Foreign, military, and economic policy should be controlled by the people, not by some elite class of unelected bureaucrats. And “the people” can’t be a watered down people which includes numerous individual nation states with different interests and goals.

Am I nuts? Do I need some tinfoil?

Maybe.

But I’m not offering this as absolute fact. I only know what I read in the papers. All I’m doing is pointing out that…

Certain people in power have certain goals. Goals they have publicly discuses.

America is the main impediment to their goals.

These people are in power now and taking actions that all but guarantee the eventual financial collapse of the Federal Government.

Now, it doesn’t take much of a stretch to assume that this is part of a plan and not some accident.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:48:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.


Whatever you say.

What were the results from that poll where they asked Texans if they wanted to leave the US? Something like only 17% in favor of leaving?

QED.

Yep your the expert on Texas, 83% of the drones who don't have anything better to do than answer questions in a poll want to remain in the US.



You really schooled me.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 7:53:13 PM EST
Unlikely.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:21:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/17/2009 8:22:18 PM EST by machinisttx]
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.


Whatever you say.

What were the results from that poll where they asked Texans if they wanted to leave the US? Something like only 17% in favor of leaving?

QED.


Texans, myself included, generally don't want to leave the union––if the fed is running things correctly. That said, if the fed is going to ruin the country, I'm pretty sure a majority would agree that Texas shouldn't go along for the ride.

Depending on how the poll was worded, *I* might have voted against leaving.

Personally, I'd rather send my tax dollars to the state than the fed. My state has generated a climate friendly to business and we haven't been hit as hard by a shit economy(a situation created by the fed) as other states. The fed on the other hand seems to think that tossing the money they steal from my fellow taxpayers to whoever has their hand out is fine and dandy, and seems bent on destroying anything favorable to business.

I think this best sums it up:

...It might have been made the interests of the Western states to remain united with us, by managing their interests honestly and for their own good. But the moment we sacrifice their interests to our own, they will see it better to govern themselves. The moment they resolve to do this, the point is settled. A forced connection is neither our interest nor within our power. Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Paris Dec. 16. 1786
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:24:30 PM EST
I'm all for it.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:28:00 PM EST
Originally Posted By azmjs:
Originally Posted By MountainMan:
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.


Then go.

North or south, it's up to you.



Balkanization is something you can't control. The only thing you can do is step down on all the disparate groups with an iron heel to keep them from tearing each other apart and forming new nations. It's just like what happened to Yugoslavia, and Yugoslavia DID have a strong man dictator to force all the groups into one unified state for decades. That's why it's called balkanization, it's the same process and conflict that's been at work there for centuries.

Of course I assume that you would rather see the United States remain united, even if it's under the iron fisted rule of a tyrant or tyrants.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:42:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By double_trouble_2003:
Originally Posted By 4v50:
It's not just Northern California. It's also southern Ory-gun. Free State of Jefferson. Live it!


Dude - Liberal crazy shit runs all the way up I5 to Seattle. SFO, Eugene, Salem, Portland, Olympia, Seattle.
Perhaps a little more research before making such blanket statements.
A move to secede on California-Oregon border
SF Chronicle ^ | Oct. 5, 2008 | Kevin Fagan
Posted on 10/06/2008 8:03:23 AM PDT by AuntB

Siskiyou County –– Some folks around here think the economic sky is falling and state lawmakers in Sacramento and Salem are ignoring their constituents in the hinterlands.

"We have nothing in common with you people down south. Nothing," said Randy Bashaw, manager of the Jefferson State Forest Products ...."The sooner we're done with all you people, the better."

Talking about secession has been a quasi-joking conversational saw since 1941, when five counties in the area started things by actually declaring themselves - briefly - to be the state of Jefferson. But now, with the economy in trouble and unemployment soaring, the idea of greater independence is getting its most serious consideration since World War II.

Locals complain that federal and state regulators have hampered the fishing and timber industries to protect forestlands and endangered species such as sucker fish and the spotted owl. Most water from the rainy Shasta region is shipped south, with little economic benefit to the area. Even the California sales tax draws sneers.

The Grange Hall of Yreka... is activating 51 of its brethren halls in the area to collect 1 million signatures to have a statehood advisory measure put on the California ballot. Tony Intiso, a runoff candidate in the Nov. 4 election for Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors, has pledged to force the issue and is running campaign ads calling for regional freedom.

"It's not rocket science to see why it makes sense, and how we could do it," said Brian Petersen, a landscaper who runs the main online forum advocating statehood, www.jeffersonstate.com. "The capitols of California and Oregon ignore us. We want out.

"All we have to do is get an initiative on the ballot and vote to get things going."


Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:49:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By MountainMan:
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.


Yep,

I'm all for the Republic of Texhoma.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:52:56 PM EST
We are at a very precarious point in our nations history. This can be resolved peacefully at this time.

I still have hope for my fellow Americans. I'm just not sure what the fuck I can do other than prepare to protect my own.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:54:38 PM EST
Originally Posted By sherrick13:
Originally Posted By MountainMan:
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.


Yep,

I'm all for the Republic of Texhoma.


New Texarkomianazona
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 8:57:13 PM EST
Nothing is forever...

well...except

Death and Taxes.....
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 10:38:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By Sleepy1988:
Originally Posted By azmjs:
Originally Posted By MountainMan:
Texas and whoever wants to come along. Can't speak for everyone but theres alot of us that has been ready to go.


Then go.

North or south, it's up to you.



Balkanization is something you can't control. The only thing you can do is step down on all the disparate groups with an iron heel to keep them from tearing each other apart and forming new nations. It's just like what happened to Yugoslavia, and Yugoslavia DID have a strong man dictator to force all the groups into one unified state for decades. That's why it's called balkanization, it's the same process and conflict that's been at work there for centuries.

Of course I assume that you would rather see the United States remain united, even if it's under the iron fisted rule of a tyrant or tyrants.


While I am opposed to the destruction of the USA by insurrection, I accept that states can secede from the union by way of constitutional amendment.

I would oppose such a policy on the grounds that it is strongly against the national interest, but nevertheless, such a thing is not impossible.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 10:56:02 PM EST
Here's the problem with the above scenario...

Everything the states have, they have because of being part of the whole...

Splitting up the union would also wreck the economy in monetary terms (who is going to accept 'New England' dollars, for example?), and place much larger financial burdens on the states...

Each new 'mini-nation' would need it's own military, with it's own chain of command... Due to duplication and potential rivalries, this would be much, much more expensive...

US foreign hegemony would be completely broken, China, India or Russia would become the next 'Supreme Power'.... Further degrading the economy, disrupting trade, and making everything more expenisve.....

In short, life as we know it on this continent would pretty much collapse...

Your taxes would go up...

And all for what?

Absolutely nothing.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 10:56:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
Here's the problem with the above scenario...

Everything the states have, they have because of being part of the whole...

Splitting up the union would also wreck the economy in monetary terms (who is going to accept 'New England' dollars, for example?), and place much larger financial burdens on the states...

Each new 'mini-nation' would need it's own military, with it's own chain of command... Due to duplication and potential rivalries, this would be much, much more expensive...

US foreign hegemony would be completely broken, China, India or Russia would become the next 'Supreme Power'.... Further degrading the economy, disrupting trade, and making everything more expenisve.....

In short, life as we know it on this continent would pretty much collapse...

Your taxes would go up...

And all for what?

Absolutely nothing.



They'd have their freedumb.

Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:02:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 6/18/2009 11:12:25 PM EST by bruh44]
If we can just send the rest of the granola eating hippies to California, I'm cool with their succession. I'd still visit on vacation once in a while. You'd just have to bring a pocket full of joints to ward them off.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:09:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
It is at least interesting to see talk like this out in the open. It used to be blowhards and idiot loudmouths who couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were on the heel. Now the talk of . . . something ugly . . . is almost mainstream. Very interesting times in which we live.

Personally, I do NOT believe a "race war" (heard mention of that most of my life) will occur, but I do believe there will some form of "tax revolt," as those with assets and income are surely not stupid enough to allow it to be taken and "redistributed."

I see this coming too. When you are successful, make decent wages, and watch half your paycheck go to support welfare leeches and the like, it can put a man over the edge.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:28:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By azmjs:
Originally Posted By Dave_A:
Here's the problem with the above scenario...

Everything the states have, they have because of being part of the whole...

Splitting up the union would also wreck the economy in monetary terms (who is going to accept 'New England' dollars, for example?), and place much larger financial burdens on the states...

Each new 'mini-nation' would need it's own military, with it's own chain of command... Due to duplication and potential rivalries, this would be much, much more expensive...

US foreign hegemony would be completely broken, China, India or Russia would become the next 'Supreme Power'.... Further degrading the economy, disrupting trade, and making everything more expenisve.....

In short, life as we know it on this continent would pretty much collapse...

Your taxes would go up...

And all for what?

Absolutely nothing.



They'd have their freedumb.


Somehow, I don't think the new 'micro-nations' would have much incentive to give it to them....

The Constitution would be gone, after all...
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:32:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.



We just cut taxes and have a $9 billion surplus for the year. And half the country depends on our natural resources and industry, especially our high-end electronics. Fuck the feds.

Oklahoma, Louisiana, and New Mexico are welcome to join the Republic of Texas.

Big deal. Utah runs a budget surplus almost every year but that is due to the fact that state agencies get alot of federal grant money. Take it away and you have a deficit. It's the same with Texas; I imagine they get billions of dollars alone in federal highway money.

Oh, and after you make up your Republic of Texas be prepared to have the rest of the US start to tax your exports. If you hated NAFTA and wanted to see it gone you'll get your wish, but you might not like it much.



Whereas I do not believe a break up is truly possible nor do I believe it is a good idea, I must say your imagination has no place in this discussion if your goal is to argue a fact-based scenario.
Link Posted: 6/17/2009 11:36:31 PM EST
Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:

Originally Posted By Justin-Kase:

Originally Posted By GarandM1:
Never happen. The states –– Texas included –– all depend on Federal $$$ to run their governments. They're not going to voluntarily give that up.


With the exception of the money the feds borrow it all comes from the states in the first place.
Even us dumb Texans know eventually the people will have to pay the national debt off.

All the states, even Texas and Utah, play a cute little game where they pretend the Feds are the big spenders but their fiscal houses are in order.

If the Feds ever stopped distributing money to the states all those "fiscally responsible" state politicians would suddenly have to cut their own budgets or raise their taxes and face the wrath of their voters. The overwhelming majority aren't willing to do it.

And I would submit the overwhelming majority of their residents aren't willing to do it, either.


Whatever you say.

What were the results from that poll where they asked Texans if they wanted to leave the US? Something like only 17% in favor of leaving?

QED.


What is the percentage required for a successful revolution? Moa may have been a commie, but he was truly a genius when it came to insurgency and revolution.

The answer is 10%, by the way. 17% is likely incorrect.

This article regarding Texas secession puts those "who think [Texas] would do better if it were independent" was 35%. That is not the same thing as wishing for secession, but it is a very telling number closely associated with secession.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top