Two Americas?

Post Reply New Topic

There's been speculation recently in " mainstt " press about the U.S.A. splitting up, due to the often&commented about " rwd-ble/cultural " divide. I saw (later)

I have heard about California and Texas talking about seceding, but nothing about the U.S. splitting into two countries.

There are already two Americas: North and South America. North America has THREE countries. CANADA, the untied stats OF America, and MEXICO.

I am assuming the OP meant the U.S.

...Yes, Tim, thank you, I did. " America " tends to be the vernacular term for the
United States of America and " Americans " for it's citizens.

......Continuing...I saw
aw an article, for instancw, in the conservative The Federalist, IIRC, wondering if the U.S.A. would split up, you coming to a " more in sorrow " conclusion that it might happen. As an example of ready-e ising pro:split sentiment, they linked to an article at Town Hall where a pro-splittee was positively licking his lips & rubbing his hands together at the prospect of a more great armed, and better at fighting, s' attempt at getting back at those attemlting to take their guns involved surrounded ding San Francisco and starving and thirsting it out. In 2016 someone here mentioned a right:wing author who imagined a Brave New World where, after a conservative triumph, traitorous members of the old media were executed and their bodies hung from public highway posts. Was this the same author ? Right. That is, obviously(?), a mega-extreme example.
On a more left side, New York Magazine recently ran a story positing a 3-way split - Red, Blue, and Unaffilated - split of the USA, by state, not into literally 100% separate countries, but strongly autonomous regions, ang going on about might might happen then in some detail.
With these up, I'll now try my hand at imaging how a two-way split of the US would work out, and what differences there might be post-split. I have thought about this before, and imagined a speculative ficrion following the idea. So away we go!

...Glossary of abbreviations I'm going to use:
USAB - USA Blue
USAR - USA Red
2018 - The USA as of 2018 - Including things that were done before, nit just this year. The USA that exists now.
CHMP - Calmer Heads May Prevail
BDRB - Both Directions Red Blue - traffic back and forth between USAB and USAR - business, human, whatever.
VWTF - Votng With Their Feet
MBS - Market Based Solutions
FL - Federalism, Localism - Differences between different states and areas

...In this line, I might focus more on how USAR might differ from 2018 more than how USAB might.
One reason for this ~ these days, I think the serious dissatisfaction with the present-day US comes more from the right than the left ~ After all, for one, many social changes of the last 50, well, 40, years may be strongly disliked by some on the right. 45-50 years ago I think it was the opposite ~ Strong dissatisfaction with the present-day standard was more a feeling on the left side, and dreams of secession may have been more strong there.
But, dow, dreams of Marxist/Maoist revolutions of hippie/Ecotopia states have rather died down! Therefore...

It's not going to happen. We are pissed at each other right now....but not enough to start another Civil War.

...Well, I'm imagining the aftermath, anyway ~ In this hypothethis, perhaps the split happens before major violence erupts.
And what about that Townhall writer I referenced?! !

I'm a blue-stater----who values red-staters, too.

But this can't happen. It would, basically, be a split before urban and rural. Even rural New Yorkers tend to be rather conservative.

Salt Lake City (and Salt Lake County) is considered a rather liberal area within the eminently conservative (red) state of Utah.

Same with urban areas of places like Texas and Oklahoma.

One could imagine the US going for something along the model of Belgium.

Belgium is basically two nations: the French speaking south, and the Flemish speaking north. Each has its own education system, and much else that's separate. But they have one military and one foreign policy, and one capital and pne central government.

So conceivably you could split the US into two halves like that. Our military would function as one. And we would ...you know...go on waging wars all over the globe as one force just as we do now. But at home there would be two separate judicial, and education systems, and other stuff. The states already have a lot of local power. But there would new layer between the states and the one federal govt. The red states would all have one "subfederal govt", and the blue another "subfederal govt".. The trouble is drawing the geographic line because the red regions and blue regions ossilate a little each election. But somehow they could draw a line. Montana, and the south, being red, and Cali and Mass being Blue, and..hmmm...both regions would be non contiguous, and would all over the place. So that would complicate it. Unless you arbitrarily lump some blue voting regions into the red, and vice versa. But the locals in those lumped areas would be angry. Hmmmm...

Never mind.

...Yes, simy putting each full existing state into one or another would be...difficult. San Francisco's California is not Bakersfield's ! Olympia's Washington is not the Eastern, rural, part! And so on.
Two more acronyms:
The Most Melodrama Might Not Occur -
TMMMNO
CYRD - Can You Really Deny

Then there’s thre. Central America

...Yeah, a 100% swould be hard...Not just for the " Who gets the good stuff? "?s...but for the, sort of, " YOU have to take Aunt Edna's Jim Reeves and Roger Whittaker and Great Operettas eight-tracks from the Logines Symphonette Society! " " Well, YOU take the stained " Goldwater For President " buttons! " argument !

There’s al ost certainly be a war as one side can’t stand other people not living how they want. That’s what causes the friction now. One side wants everyone to be exactly like them and do exactly as they say and the other doesn’t want that.
I watched a well thought out video on it. The democrats end up holding 3 strongholds that can just be starved out. Northwest, California and northeast. They lack the military power and it’d take Time to train a military especially from people who don’t ever want to touch a gun and freak out at the sight of one, meanwhile republicans habe 70% or more of a existing military power, as well as most the generals and officers to lead them, giving them a huge advantage of going on offensive quickly and trialing mor trumps. They also have majority of ther population armed and good amount of trained vets. They also control most if not all of the food supply.
Question. How long do the peasants growing and making the food expected to put up with all the crap democrats want to force on them all while telling the, they don’t matter?
I’m a city person, seems to me it’s best not to piss off the people who feed is. I can’t grow food, I can’t farm animals, I can’t hunt. Most city people can’t. What happens to us when food stops showing up at our stores? All food would be gone after 2 weeks. Most truckers and train workers are republicans too. Contractors, construction workers, road builders etc. I don’t think democrats quite realize Whole it is they say is worthless and doesn’t matter.

People on the right often wonder how the left can protest every day on week days. They say they must not have jobs, and I think they’re right. I can’t attnd a pro gun rally cause I work. I can’t protest cause I work. How do protestors afford to go protest for days on end, certainly their jobs wouldn’t allow them to.

I think democrats should leave well enough alone. I’m a Democrat and in my opinion the party has lost its way.
It use to be about helping people now it’s all about controlling people and making them do whatever the party wants

The republican part of Oregon 90% of Oregon would demand their own separate state or rise up and force all democrats out of the state, i i dont know where I’d go then.