A National Divorce

[Magyars]

Like it or not, we're heading for a major hurt in this country.
Be it a "divorce ", economic crisis or EMP, or something else.

 

[ancjr]

View attachment 257244

Caption: "Socio-economic disaster areas in the US"

 

[HoughMade]

Caption: "Socio-economic disaster areas in the US"

Socio....sure, but a great deal of wealth is concentrated in those same areas. If it were not, the red areas could do pretty much as they pleased.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

This is a good point. ”Conservatives”, too many of them that call themselves that anyway, are simply unwilling to not be nice. They think they can watch their Fox News and then go vote republican every couple of years and think they’ve fought back. Meanwhile the radicals are running for city/county councils, school boards, etc. and are implementing their agendas little by little. And the republicans are more afraid of the teachers’ unions than they are of their own constituents. Too many on “our side” have more important things to do and believe if they mind their own business, they’ll be left alone.

“Perhaps the biggest obstacle to national divorce is the absence of any concrete justification for separation. Most national divorce advocates say that Red States must exit the union because of wokeness. Wokeness may be infuriating to millions of Americans, but for most, wokeness is an abstract concern. People are not going to give up their homes and 401ks over drag queen story hour.”

The National Divorce Delusion

The Right’s favorite fantasy shows its impotence

highlyrespected.substack.com

 

[Tombs]

To me the options going forward are simple.

When you have a population who lives in 2 entirely different realities you can either do:
1.) Kill all the people who don't conform to the majority opinion (What most authoritarian governments have done in the past)
2.) Split off peacefully

There's no compromise that can be made. These are 2 entirely different realities, and no amount of talking will change that.

People who decry splitting off as unthinkable have an obvious agenda in mind.

There's a 3rd option but it's ugly. That's a war for survival of your nation that would involve mass conscription, and likely a global conflict. Think about how things went after Pearl Harbor, or 9/11.

I think the 3rd option is likely being formulated right now, using Ukraine as a catalyst. If China makes moves on Taiwan, a failure at a radar station that results in a lot of US assets/people being killed would provide the excuse to mobilize on a scale necessary to satisfy the 3rd option.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

To me the options going forward are simple.

When you have a population who lives in 2 entirely different realities you can either do:
1.) Kill all the people who don't conform to the majority opinion (What most authoritarian governments have done in the past)
2.) Split off peacefully

There's no compromise that can be made. These are 2 entirely different realities, and no amount of talking will change that.

People who decry splitting off as unthinkable have an obvious agenda in mind.

There's a 3rd option but it's ugly. That's a war for survival of your nation that would involve mass conscription, and likely a global conflict.

I think that's an oversimplification. In the first "Civil War", the dividing line was pretty clear between northern states and southern states. That is no longer the case. There are "pockets" of blue in a sea of red, (see @BigRed 's map). How do you divide that up?

 

[Tombs]

I think that's an oversimplification. In the first "Civil War", the dividing line was pretty clear between northern states and southern states. That is no longer the case. There are "pockets" of blue in a sea of red, (see @BigRed 's map). How do you divide that up?

"Special economic zones."

Basically you provide those regions autonomy and cooperation with outside governments, but keep them on a short leash as to not let them influence politics outside of their bubble.

I think a split can be accomplished in a much more mature way than "lol you don't exist now!" kind of thinking.
You can just have separate laws and government jurisdiction governing those regions. I mean that's effectively how this country was supposed to work until we decided to massively expand federal authority.

Ultimately we just need to divide urban and rural governance. That's what most of this boils down to at the end of the day. It doesn't need to be a hostile exchange, just a different set of laws, and respect for each other's rights within their region.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

"Special economic zones."

Basically you provide those regions autonomy and cooperation with outside governments, but keep them on a short leash as to not let them influence politics outside of their bubble.

And when those zones happen to have the highest concentration of economic wealth (as they do today) and they decide they don't need you any longer, then what?

 

[Tombs]

And when those zones happen to have the highest concentration of economic wealth (as they do today) and they decide they don't need you any longer, then what?

Everyone needs resources, be it for manufacturing, workers, minerals, oil, etc. Indianapolis is not going to start bulldozing sky scrapers and build thousand acre fields.

Most of those resources are not in those regions. Trade almost always provides an avenue for peaceful exchange and cooperation.

 

[BigRed]

Everyone needs resources, be it for manufacturing, workers, minerals, oil, etc.

Most of those resources are not in those regions. Trade almost always provides an avenue for peaceful exchange and cooperation.

Indeed.

I see a large swath of land right through the middle of the continent loaded with natural resources, waterways, productive fields, and ports.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Everyone needs resources, be it for manufacturing, workers, minerals, oil, etc. Indianapolis is not going to start bulldozing sky scrapers and build thousand acre fields.

Most of those resources are not in those regions. Trade almost always provides an avenue for peaceful exchange and cooperation.

Do you see those regions as more likely to trade with the red areas or with foreign entities (as they do today)? Natural resources - I'll give you that. But microchips or other raw materials, I'm not so sure about.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Indeed.

I see a large swath of land right through the middle of the continent loaded with natural resources, waterways, productive fields, and ports.

Much of which is owned by Chinese and other foreign entities.

 

[Tombs]

Do you see those regions as more likely to trade with the red areas or with foreign entities (as they do today)? Natural resources - I'll give you that. But microchips or other raw materials, I'm not so sure about.

I think once people are not at each other's throats trying to force each other to live under their world view, a lot of the animosity will disperse in short order. Making that situation more or less irrelevant.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I think once people are not at each other's throats trying to force each other to live under their world view, a lot of the animosity will disperse in short order. Making that situation more or less irrelevant.

Perhaps. I'm not so confident.

 

[BigRed]

Much of which is owned by Chinese and other foreign entities.

Thank the central state for that....the same one holding the southern border open for the ongoing invasion.

I suspect the States that do not want the chinese and foreign entities around can run them right out on a rail. It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[NoAdmiration]

I'm not interested in seeding ground to people with socially destructive ideas.

Nor am I naive enough to think they will stay on their side of the line. We let them have New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, and Memphis...
What on earth makes people think they will stop there?

As their terrible ideas destroy their own areas, they will inevitably want to expand and they are not the sort to ask permission or respect borders.

No, we need to crush their ideas and reduce them to a punch line in a bar joke.

This will require courage and moral clarity.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Thank the central state for that....the same one holding the southern border open for the ongoing invasion.

I suspect the States that do not want the chinese and foreign entities around can run them right out on a rail. It wouldn't be the first time.

I don't think it's that simple. What's the mechanism for that? I think you're living under the illusion of what you want to happen vs. what the situation actually is right now. We were warned of foreign entanglements, but now we are neck deep in them. They won't be undone so quickly or simply.

 

[BigRed]

I don't think it's that simple. What's the mechanism for that? I think you're living under the illusion of what you want to happen vs. what the situation actually is right now. We were warned of foreign entanglements, but now we are neck deep in them. They won't be undone so quickly or simply.

 

[Tombs]

Thank the central state for that....the same one holding the southern border open for the ongoing invasion.

I suspect the States that do not want the chinese and foreign entities around can run them right out on a rail. It wouldn't be the first time.

I don't think trade with china is inherently a bad thing.

It's the dependence they are cultivating that is bad. We should have good trade relations with china, but that should be a very healthy 2 way street with balanced books. Any manufacturing that goes there should be replaced with domestic manufacturing china has to rely on.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Sorry... TL/WW