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.
Not necessarily, because over there, the LEFT is on the rise as it should, since Russia is the ORIGINAL left-wing country, not burdened by racial or feminist issues.
I believe the nation has reached a divided point of no return politically, socially, spiritually... everything. I've seen this coming ever since the resurgence of wartime patriotism post 9/11 failed to sustain itself and was almost immediately replaced with the constant widening of the political gap.
I am not advocating or promoting civil war in any way, shape or form (although I fear that is where we are headed regardless if things stay as they are).....but my question is were it possible to divide the country into separate nations WITHOUT resorting to violence, would you be for it or no?
Separate nations that would basically start over with everything. I would be for building a wall between them and severely restricting travel between the two so as to avoid one side infiltrating the other and taking things back to square one.
I know this a potentially volatile and obviously vague scenario chock full of what if's, but I thought I might serve up some tasty food for thought this afternoon in the midst of 2020's seemingly incessant chaos.
Sounds good to me! We'd finally live in a peaceful society.
What if it came down to that or war? Would it be worth trying to avoid the sheer horror and devastation that a civil war would bring?
There's not going to be a war. The radical left is going to stay in their cities--they're not going out into the sticks; The radical right is going to stay in the sticks, they're not going into the inner cities. Neither one wants to own the turf of the other.
If the left and right could create separate nations without war, would you be for it?
What makes you think it would be "without war"?
As soon as the liberals found they wee getting hungry because they couldn't produce enough food, and their lights went out because they couldn't power or maintain their generators, and their power went out because their solar systems were underpowered and unreliable, they'd invade the conservatives to take their stuff. But that wouldn't last, since the conservatives had most of the guns, training, and will to defend themselves.
I'd be opposed to such a transformation, even if it could be done in idyllic peace and flourishing prosperity. The reason is that I partake of values core to both the Left and the Right, and would be alienated in either culture, if either were to dominate. On matters of religion or "morality", and especially sexual morality, I'd be hard-left. On matters of taxation, property rights and guns, I'm hard-right. On matters of immigration, trade and commerce, I'm a Davos-loving and EU-cheering globalist. On matters of response to the coronavirus, I've become a shrill Trumpster (or Bolsonarist? Because I think that Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro is doing a better job). On matters of higher-education and spending on science and the arts, I'm a Europhile closet-socialist. And so on.
What I'd perhaps most crave, is to live neither in a democracy nor a republic nor a Hobbesian totalitarian state nor some libertarian jungle, but in an aristocratic oligarchy. It would consist of a tiny nobility, which rules; a larger but still small class of technocrats, which executes the workings of government and industry; and a vast horde of Proles, who till the soil but who otherwise don't participate in civic-life.
I used to say no, but this nation has gone so insane that my answer would be yes now, but it would have to be a system where the current billionaire central bank elites and mega-corporations are NOT welcome. No fractional reserve debt based privately run central bank in my nation. It would be a failure, but the US is on the brink of collapse anyways so it won't matter.
It would represent the downfall of our country as a superpower, but at this point it seems to me that thats the intent of those on the right anyway. Its been discussed a ton on this board, but usually the folks on the right get surprised at how much technology, and....get this...farming the more left wing states do. Especially california.
The other surprise for folks is that theres a ton of folks with opposing views in each state. Yeah we call things red and blue states-but the reality is they ARENT all red, or all blue. Texas is a good example-that one may be blue this election. You arent getting your all red or all blue countries this way.
So ultimately its a failed idea. Russia bankrolled a attempt at this early on in Trumps run. So even our enemies want us to do that. Which should make most reasonable people realize how foolish this is.
We could do red and blue states though. Do a modified Brexit.
in 2016, the counties that voted for Clinton accounted for 2/3s of the economic activity of the nation.
On a broader scale, some states contribute more the federal budget than they get back. Some states get back more than the pitch in. With a few exceptions, the givers tend to be blue states and the takers red states.
So we get those gerrymandering experts to redraw the lines. We divide up Social Security, Medicare, and national debt, and let people shift to the areas they belong. That poor soul who keeps posting about how South/North Dakota is the land of milk and honey can move there.
Those that are fine with a lower economy wouldn't be forced to keep up the wealthier areas.
Of course, you'd have to have some sort system to control people from moving from one state to the other. Perhaps the requirement that folks be self-supporting before resettling.
It would also mean a much lower contribution to the federal budget, which would limit the amount we spend on the military. Which would be likely be a good move for the planet.
Yes. And I think an amicable divorce is not only possible but likely. It would the healthiest thing we could do.
Each state could determine red or blue by majority vote. Not difficult at all.
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.
