Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny how everyone thinks that these "new nations" would be broken down by the conservative/liberal dichotomy. That's silly.
If the Solidly Red South were to become its own nation tomorrow, their new government would be no different than the corrupt, money hungry fools presently in Washington right now. Government WOULD NOT be small, nor would it be more effective. That's a pipe dream. All that big talk about conservative values would be meaningless, and a right wing/left wing battle would emerge just like it has in every other country. Thinking that this new nation would be a conservative values utopia is a fantasy. There would be plenty of welfare and other handouts too.
In any case, I'm not interested in breaking up the country. I see no reason for it, and even debating it or raising it as some sort of necessity going forward seems treasonous to me...or ay least unpatriotic to a large degree.
Funny how everyone thinks that these "new nations" would be broken down by the conservative/liberal dichotomy. That's silly.
If the Solidly Red South were to become its own nation tomorrow, their new government would be no different than the corrupt, money hungry fools presently in Washington right now. Government WOULD NOT be small, nor would it be more effective. That's a pipe dream. All that big talk about conservative values would be meaningless, and a right wing/left wing battle would emerge just like it has in every other country. Thinking that this new nation would be a conservative values utopia is a fantasy. There would be plenty of welfare and other handouts too.
In any case, I'm not interested in breaking up the country. I see no reason for it, and even debating it or raising it as some sort of necessity going forward seems treasonous to me...or ay least unpatriotic to a large degree.
Yes it is unpatriotic, even treasonous. That's kinda' the point. On this poll, on this forum, there are those who just don't feel all that faithful to washington. If you were to look at this country you would find we are just the tip of the iceberg. It's what one would expect for a nation with the deep divisions this one has.
If you think about it there is a reason the democratic party continues to rely on identity politics to win elections. That political party doesn't create these schisms in this society they simply take advantage of it. There's a reason that southern border remains open. There's a reason latino gangs are driving blacks out of neighborhoods they consider their own. There's a reason both blacks and whites are leaving california in the numbers they are. There's a reason blacks are abandoning the north and returning south. There's a reason the democratic party will continue to lose whites. There's a reason such a disparate grouping of peoples simply will not stay in a union such as ours. History tells us this much. It's only a question of when and how the break up will occur. You can call it treason if you want to. I call it facing reality.
this from an article from an author named brownstein at the national journal.
Anyone touring Ohio, the epicenter of Campaign 2012, is confronted not only with the visceral passion, but the cavernous divisions that this election has provoked. Here, and in all likelihood nationally, Obama and Romney are assembling coalitions that are inimical in their demography and priorities yet almost equal in size. Uniting Americans behind any common purpose after an election that appears certain to divide them that deeply and closely looms as a daunting, perhaps insurmountable, challenge for whichever man wins next week.
Last edited by Dutchman01; 11-04-2012 at 05:39 AM..
For those that keep trying to say the conservative states are all broke, take a look at that map, you will find that there are plenty of liberal and conservative states getting much more money back from the government then they put in. Even California where those Washington where many IT companies are based take more then they give.
Q: Should the US break up into 3 or 4 smaller countries?
A: Depends on what the function of government is.
It's not a deflection.
It's necessary to figure out "what" the purpose of a government is.
Under the republican form, promised in Art. 4, Sec. 4, USCON, it is one in which the people are sovereigns, served - not ruled - by governments that were instituted to secure their endowed rights.
Under the democratic form, it is one in which the subject citizens submit to the government in exchange for privileges and immunities.
Most Americans have been thoroughly indoctrinated to be good little socialist serfs, taught that they're "born citizens" subject to perform mandatory civic duties - which would be unconstitutional in the 50 states united, saith the 13th amendment. (Don't bother your pretty little heads with reading law!)
Since socialism abolishes absolute ownership of private property and replaces it with qualified ownership shared with the collective State, one must fully comprehend exactly WHO benefits from the dissolution of the union of states.
If you think the ability of Americans to dissuade invaders would be improved by splitting up the country, then you have your answer.
Personally, I think that anyone suggesting fracture of the union is aiding the predators who can't wait for America to collapse.
Remember, "Divide and Conquer!".
Anyone who reads history, understands that when the USA was being formed, countries, were not necessarily called countries, they were called States, hence the name United "States" of America. The way this country was formed, and the way and the constitution was written, imply that each state would would give up certain responsibilities to the federal government (such as maintaining a military, and establishing a currency system), however the States would operate as their own separate "countries" if you will. Each state would be allowed to make laws and govern as they see fit, so long as they don't violate anything that was written in the Bill of Rights. By doing this each State could be come a test bed of political thought and ideas, and should some state come up with something that improves progress in that state, businesses and people could be free to move their and live.
This idea has long since been eroded by power hungry politicians in Washington who believe the federal government should be the answer to everything.
So to answer the pollster's question, if breaking up into smaller "countries" means giving back the rights that should be afforded by the states in the first place, then hell yes I'm all for that. However we know that will never happen.
Anyone who reads history, understands that when the USA was being formed, countries, were not necessarily called countries, they were called States, hence the name United "States" of America. The way this country was formed, and the way and the constitution was written, imply that each state would would give up certain responsibilities to the federal government (such as maintaining a military, and establishing a currency system), however the States would operate as their own separate "countries" if you will. Each state would be allowed to make laws and govern as they see fit, so long as they don't violate anything that was written in the Bill of Rights. By doing this each State could be come a test bed of political thought and ideas, and should some state come up with something that improves progress in that state, businesses and people could be free to move their and live.
This idea has long since been eroded by power hungry politicians in Washington who believe the federal government should be the answer to everything.
So to answer the pollster's question, if breaking up into smaller "countries" means giving back the rights that should be afforded by the states in the first place, then hell yes I'm all for that. However we know that will never happen.
But, the federal government gave up on a strict constructional view rather quickly.
Jefferson, one of the strict constructional supporters, threw out that view to buy louisana. So here we are, almost from the adoption, interpreting the constitution, and people seem to forget that is the entire history of our country just about.
Every president, every congress yand every supreme court since then has interpreted what they think the words mean.
Anyone who reads history, understands that when the USA was being formed, countries, were not necessarily called countries, they were called States, hence the name United "States" of America. The way this country was formed, and the way and the constitution was written, imply that each state would would give up certain responsibilities to the federal government (such as maintaining a military, and establishing a currency system), however the States would operate as their own separate "countries" if you will. Each state would be allowed to make laws and govern as they see fit, so long as they don't violate anything that was written in the Bill of Rights. By doing this each State could be come a test bed of political thought and ideas, and should some state come up with something that improves progress in that state, businesses and people could be free to move their and live.
This idea has long since been eroded by power hungry politicians in Washington who believe the federal government should be the answer to everything.
So to answer the pollster's question, if breaking up into smaller "countries" means giving back the rights that should be afforded by the states in the first place, then hell yes I'm all for that. However we know that will never happen.
Correct!
And it all started with Lincoln who set us on a path of ever increasing federal government power.
And it all started with Lincoln who set us on a path of ever increasing federal government power.
Started with Adams and Jefferson. Lincoln blew it up, we agree on that, but the die was cast long before 1860.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
