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.
So it's painfully obvious to anyone that there are two distinct cultures in America that, frankly, just don't get along. With each passing year, this gets worse...and worse...and even worse. One possible solution is to mutually agree that we just don't belong with each other and separate for our own sakes.
Note that this thread isn't about blaming one side or the other... this is about our future and whether or not it is one that we share.
Of course if we did split, we would have to have it make geographical sense... i.e. Indiana may share more common traits with the conservative south, and New Mexico may share more common traits with the liberal north...but for the sake of geographical continuity, they would have to be placed in their opposing country. In addition, some states in the middle would probably have to be split up (VA, WV, KY, MO, KS, and CO mainly). Of course recognizing that both sides would have members on either side of the border, an appropriate amount of time should be given for people to choose which country they want to live in and move accordingly.
There are other benefits too... by having smaller populations, our respective legislatures would have many less citizens per legislative member. That's a huge plus... and with less pure hatred for both sides, we would be able to actually pass legislation and let our respective countries move forward.
Sure, make one country out of the left coast and the northeast. The rest plus Alaska remains America, and keeps the flag and the military. The new liberal country can have a rainbow flag and won't need a military.
Major urban centers left in America that are far left hotbeds, like Chicago and Detroit, can be designated as prisons for both countries after their populations are repatriated in New York, which would be renamed New Moscow in the new liberal country.
So it's painfully obvious to anyone that there are two distinct cultures in America that, frankly, just don't get along. With each passing year, this gets worse...and worse...and even worse. One possible solution is to mutually agree that we just don't belong with each other and separate for our own sakes.
Note that this thread isn't about blaming one side or the other... this is about our future and whether or not it is one that we share.
Of course if we did split, we would have to have it make geographical sense... i.e. Indiana may share more common traits with the conservative south, and New Mexico may share more common traits with the liberal north...but for the sake of geographical continuity, they would have to be placed in their opposing country. In addition, some states in the middle would probably have to be split up (VA, WV, KY, MO, KS, and CO mainly). Of course recognizing that both sides would have members on either side of the border, an appropriate amount of time should be given for people to choose which country they want to live in and move accordingly.
There are other benefits too... by having smaller populations, our respective legislatures would have many less citizens per legislative member. That's a huge plus... and with less pure hatred for both sides, we would be able to actually pass legislation and let our respective countries move forward.
So, what do you think?
I think insanity such as this needs to stop. We are one great country and most of Americans are more alike than different. This ignorance about splitting up the country is stupidity and it is getting old for most people.
Of course you are going to have the ignorant that will jump on this and add their 2 cents worth, but that's about what it is worth 2 cents.
Sure, make one country out of the left coast and the northeast. The rest plus Alaska remains America, and keeps the flag and the military. The new liberal country can have a rainbow flag and won't need a military.
Major urban centers left in America that are far left hotbeds, like Chicago and Detroit, can be designated as prisons for both countries after their populations are repatriated in New York, which would be renamed New Moscow in the new liberal country.
From the standpoint of the republican form, where the sovereign people's rights are secured by servant government, any dissolution of that Union would be detrimental.
The perpetual union created by the Articles of Confederation, and modified into the more perfect union by the U.S. Constitution, was instituted to secure rights and govern those who consent. This is in harmony with the Declaration of Independence.
Which also means that the union created by the citizens (consenting subjects) of each state to serve the sovereign people is inviolate. No subject citizens or their organized compact governments have a delegated power to secede from that union created for the benefit of the SOVEREIGN people (who are not parties to those compacts). I cannot fathom how the sovereign people served by government would be better served by secession. Only a feckless citizenry would be so inclined to destroy the institution they serve in.
===
"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
As Lincoln reminds us, NO MAN (nor American government) is good enough to govern you without your consent.
===
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
===
The people of the state, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the king by his own prerogative.
Lansing v. Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9, (NY)
At the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people and they are truly the sovereigns of the country.
Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, 463
It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
[ Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)]
Sovereignty itself is, of course not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.
[Yick Wo vs Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)]
Remember, citizens are subjects, by definition. Citizens have mandatory civic duties, that void any presumption of sovereignty. There is no such thing as a "sovereign citizen."
If one is unhappy with submission to the constitutionally limited indirect democracy, there is always the option to withdraw consent, and restore one's status as a sovereign American non-citizen / non-subject.
No just go back to the Constitution under the beliefs of the founders. States rights=diversity
An adult responded.
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.
