The Idea of a National Divorce/Splitting Up the Country

An idea that has been brought up more and more in recent years. It's been brought up again by the dumb Marjorie Taylor Greene (someone I have no respect for) recently. Marjorie Taylor Greene might have brought up the idea for the wrong reasons (essentially just political) but more and more I genuinely believe it's the right course of action going forward.

Now I will say this, I don't see it as just a split up into 2 countries (liberal and conservative). For it to really work it would the lower 48 states would need to split up in 5 countries. There would need to be a Northeast country, a Southeast country, a Midwest country, a Rocky Mountain/Mountain West country and a West Coast country. Hawaii would either become its own country again or join up with the West Coast country. Alaska would either become its own country again or join up with Canada.

Now of course there would be the usual questions. Comments like you are going to break up families and that I shouldn't have to move. What I would say to that is simple, yes some families will break up and some families will stay together. That is a choice each individual family will have to make. And yes some people would have to move to go to a country that will fit in the most with their values. For example if you're a Republican in California you would have to move probably to the Southeast or Rocky Mountain/Mountain West country. If you're a Liberal in Texas you would have to move probably to the Northeast country or West Coast country. People on both sides would have to make sacrifices.

There would then be the question of how resources are divided up. For example the national debt would be shared between each of the five countries based off their population. So for example if the Northeast country has 40% of the former U.S. population they would be responsible for 40% of the former U.S. debt. Same with Social Security and Medicare, payout whatever is left to each country in proportion to its population. So for example if the Southeast country had 15% of the former U.S. population they would get 15% of what is left in the Social Security and Medicare funds. As for military bases, which I know is always a hot point of discussion in any sort of national divorce talks, the U.S. could basically offer the individual countries to buy the military bases for a certain price or the U.S. dismantles the bases and destroys any materials/products/vehicles/facilities on the premises before handing the land over to the country.

If done right there could even be a 5 year period or so where people will have time to determine what country they will live in. They don't have to move but they will be subject to the laws of the new country that they live in. So for example a New York Republican would not have to leave New York but they probably aren't going to like the laws in the new Northeast country. A Florida Democrat would not have to leave Florida but they probably aren't going to like the laws in a new Southeast country. There could be even be an agreement to where the laws and legal framework of the country have to be determined at least 2 years before the split is finalized, that way each citizen can make the best informed decision for themselves and their families.

Say what you want. Mock my proposal all of want. I don't see a better long term solution for the U.S. as a whole. The U.S. as a whole is becoming more divided and more hostile towards each other every single day. People are self isolating. People are already starting to move based off of their politics (As an example conservatives in California, New York and New Jersey are all but abandoning those areas to go to Texas and Florida). This will mean the only exposure people will have to the other side is through the echo chamber media. We are getting very close to the point where each side will view the other side as something less than human. History shows us that when we look at people as less than human terrible things are destined to happen.

Marjorie Taylor Greene might have given the right answer to the division in the U.S., just for all the wrong reasons. A split up of just two countries I don't think would ever genuinely work as the two countries would still be far too big, but five would. D.C. has become too corrupt and too powerful. Most importantly D.C. has forgotten who they are supposed to represent. D.C. no longer represents the entire U.S., it represents itself and I see no way to fix that in its current iteration.

Like it or not I see only two long term possibilities for the U.S. A difficult but peaceful and at least somewhat orderly national divorce. A national divorce that brings governance and politics back to the people of their individual countries. If that doesn't happen the only other option I see happening is an inevitable Civil War that will utterly destroy this country. If you truly don't believe these are the only two long term options what option do you realistically see?

 

And don't get me wrong. I don't want to see a National Divorce, but I think it's the only way we survive long term in any type of way. The other option of a Civil War of course is much much worse. The only other option in theory would be subjugation of one side or the other. Even if that could occur temporarily (thought one party rule) in the end all that will lead to is a revolution/overthrow of the government, which will still result in a Civil War.

Congress is a disaster right now. But really think about it, Congress is just a reflection of the American people. America itself is a disaster right now.

Typically countries stay together when they have national culture or at least some sort of shared values. What shared value do you truly think both sides share right now? I ask as I genuinely do not see a single value that both sides share in this country. Even 10 years ago I wouldn't have said that, but I am saying it now.

 

Well thank you, I appreciate your back handed compliment. But answer this question for me, what values do both sides share currently? What values will keep the U.S. together?

Let's say Republicans get control of everything, do you really think Democrats would accept one party rule? Let's say Democrats get control over everything, do you really think Republicans would accept one party rule? Do you really think either side is going to say "oh shucks, we lost, we'll just have to deal with it"? January 6th, 2021 already showed that we are getting beyond that.

Neither side is going to accept the vision the other side has for the country. The two sides have become that incompatible.

So what's the other option, gridlock? So we have that now and nothing gets done and the country continues to falter. Not exactly a good option.

Civil War? We've already discussed that.

So where do you think the U.S. goes long term. You have to admit that the current state of politics in the U.S. is unsustainable long term.

 

Everyone assumes the South will always have a terrible economy but if the South had Texas and Georgia that alone would make the South a formidable economy. Energy, Agriculture, major international companies, access to the Gulf and by extension the Atlantic. Not saying the South wouldn't have its problems and it's not probably not where I would live (in this scenario I'm probably going to the Rocky Mountains/Mountain West country as I'm a country/nature person at heart) but it's not the 1850's. The South would have a formidable economy. The challenges for the South would mostly be in regards to social issues and poverty in several clusters.

Take the Northeast country for example. Yes they would have the most wealth but the most wealth doesn't put food in the table. Where would the northeast get their food? Not a lot of good agriculture in those areas. Money doesn't mean much when you are starving to death.

The West Coast country would have incredible economic resources but they would be one drought away from people not having water to drink. One drought away from not having water for agriculture. Money doesn't mean much when you don't have any water and your country breaks out into anarchy. Where will the West Coast country get its energy?

Each country would have its own challenges that they would need to overcome. The South and Midwest countries would not be in the best shape economically but they would still have water, food and energy which are all incredibly important.

 

You are right that the national political rhetoric in the country is vicious. There are plenty of people on both sides that literally would be okay if the other side died. Think about that for a minute. That is where we are.

My point is I don't see anything that will calm down the national political rhetoric. There's really no putting the genie back in the bottle. I think the national political rhetoric will continue to deteriorate until there's flat out violence between the two sides. Is that really where we want to go?

Why is a National Divorce that terrible of an idea? Would you want an abused spouse to stay in an abusive relationship? Of course not. If we can allow divorce in our personal lives, why is it such a terrible idea on the national level? Heck I'm sure you could find people on both sides who believe that the other side is essentially abusive towards them. When will we admit that the country just isn't united anymore? That's there's nothing united about the United States of America?

 

True, and there would still be commerce between the countries. Heck the countries could even adopt the same currency, similar to the Euro. But here's the thing, that food you get now, say it came from another country. That other country, that you are saying would be economically devastated, could decide they are going to charge five times the price. So then you're paying five times the price for that food as you were when the U.S. was one country.

Same for water. The Rocky Mountain/Mountain West country could easily block control of the Colorado river from the West Coast states. One bad drought and the Rocky Mountain/Mountain West country could easily say we are charging 10x the amount for that water. Suddenly water becomes incredibly expensive in the West Coast country and the Rocky Mountain/Mountain West country becomes a lot wealthier.

 

And you think Indonesia, Europe and South America are going to give you that food for free? You'll be paying significantly more for that food.

 

Of course not, but if you think you'll be getting your food at the exact same price that you are in the current U.S. you would be in for a big surprise. In general life still becomes simple when it comes down to survival. I would want to be in a country that has a good amount of water rights or a good amount of agricultural over a country with a good "economy" but no natural water rights (West Coast country in this scenario) or significant natural agriculture (Northeast country in this scenario).