Secession: Can we all get along? Should the union split in two?

There have been two GD:C2004 threads on the subject.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1132245

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1132668

I'm totally serious. Screw the Conferderacy, let them have their own freaked up country instead of freaking up America.

run 50 different systems... The sucessful systems will succeed and the others will fail...hmmm, wait a min.. didnt we have that before at some point?

I kinda would like the idea of just shifting to the state I thought most reflected my philosophy.

We will NOT split this nation .....

THAT was already decided ...

IF THEY dont like it, THEY can move to ..... um ....

WHO the FUCK would want Right Wing Nutcases ? ...

Fiji ? ... Poland ???

Where does a Fascist make his home now ? ..

Anyways: FUCK THEM: .... If THEY dont love America: THEY can leave it .....

Fucking hypocrites ....

what makes america great is there is such a diverse array of opinions. i dont want to live in a country where there are only liberals or only conservatives.

david

agreed

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

we can have one peaceful, undivided nation unless that happens.

The problem is that the hateful, warmongering United States of Fundie Fascism will declare war on the rest of us as soon as the secession is complete.

in the conventional sense of US politics, Republican, Democrat.

It may start out that way, it may be labelled as such, but as events unfold, those distinctions will become increasingly irrelevant.

divided we fall"

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

They're the first ones who would turn tail and run. And I suspect they're the same ones who run around stating they're leaving the country if dumbass wins this election.

All talk...

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

Inscribed in the Lincoln Memorial:
"IN THIS TEMPLE AS IN THE HEARTS OF THE PEOPLE FOR WHOM HE SAVED THE UNION THE MEMORY OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN IS ENSHRINED FOREVER."

The freepers are a pathetic, straggling minority. They do not deserve their own country, and I am not willing to fracture this nation because of a few sociopaths. This is OUR country - every state in the Union belongs to We, The People. If the freepers want to secede, we don't let them - just as Lincoln didn't let the Confederacy secede. A house divided against itself cannot stand, and we should never forget that we are the majority. We will take back this country and they will scurry like cockroaches back into their dank and dismal holes, awaiting the next rise of fascism. But if we let them have even the smallest of victories, they will have won.

"It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

I'm not letting freepers take that away from me, or from any of us.

because of the quote which brought tears to my eyes. But the sad thing is, Bush could give a similar speech, well written, about our honored dead not having died in vain, about One Nation Under God, about Government of, by, and for The People, and I wouldn't believe a word of what are in themselves, true words. I also can't believe Bush when he states that he is a devout Christian. Like what he has done to the word freedom, another example. The entire world sees the hypocrisy and contradiction he makes by using the word. I read somewhere years ago that a real sign of division in a nation was when the meanings of words change. I'm afraid I'm at that point. I was about to cast a vote for division, because Bush was never our elected official in the first place, and if he's re-elected and there is an option for succesion (sp?), I'd be so tempted. It would be easier than leaving the country.

It boils my blood to see him twist and pervert the words "freedom" and "liberty" into mere Orwellian newspeak, meaning the opposite of what they always have. But I believe that the idea of America is far greater than George Bush and his petty scheming; it is greater even than all of us. If you haven't seen "Going Upriver" (I HIGHLY recommend it), John Kerry gives a speech to the Vietnam Vets, about why their protests were important. I forget the exact words, but he said something about how "America is greater than its government, greater than Richard Nixon, or Lyndon Johnson, or any of us." And that is why we must fight to keep the dream alive. We are the guardians of the American dream, and I won't let neoconservative fascists take that dream away from us, because the dream is the very soul of America. We have to win this ideological battle, because the spirit of the nation depends on it; so that those who gave the last full measure of devotion will not have died in vain.

:eyes:

But hey, I live in a red county in very blue California. Also, I don't know if the right-wing and left-wing could get along even with a border in between. We might be invaded in a few years.

if we left religion out of the equation, if nobody imposed the tenants of their religion on others, i think we could get along! we used to!

Maybe blue states can teach science, research stem cells, recognize gay marriage, uphold the right to choose, & the red states can teach religion, shun science, invade people s privacy, & then they will stop telling us what to do.

and the vote totals here are truly disgusting

Just make sure liberals and progressives can get out. But it seems as if all states are getting less progressive because of budget constraints. Maybe splitting will fix that.

SC freeze out progressives for a decade or 2 or 3, I'd opt for it. Fact is, the Red states would be hardpressed to maintain their society...this country is what it is because of liberal progressive values.

It would be a grand social experiment that I hope we never have to contemplate seriously.

I feel the same way. If the media would give us facts for news instead of propaganda, most people would not have such divisive opinions. It seems to me that a lot of the divisiveness in this country started when the media no longer had to present both sides of an argument.(fairness doctrine?) Also the lack of diversity in the media is a large part of this.

Many people have a hard time believing my or your side of the story if they never hear it from a "reliable source".

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

When people say such things on partisan websites these days, it's taken very seriously by many people.

It is without questions that many Freepers and no small amount of DUers took what you said seriously.

</sarcasm off> is an easy way to show that you don't mean that crazy shit.

....they're letting their frustrations with the right wing cloud their thinking on this. I'll admit to fantisizing about it myself out of such frustration.

There's no way it could happen without tremendous suffering for everyone. It doesn't have to end up like that.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/GENERAL/CAMPAIGN/2004/pred04.php

What would link the West Coast to the Midwest, or the Midwest to the Northeast? How could these states remain united in a war against the United States?

How could a nation be built on the idea that states have the right to give up when things are going badly? How could such a nation win a war against a military better funded than all the others combined?

When the southern states broke away, it was with the assumption that Lincoln would not be willing to wage the war necessary to reunite the country. Few Americans think Bush would hesitate to wage war on the rebelling states.

Most southern states seceded, even though the majority of the southern population wished to remain in the Union. In Tennessee the proposal to call a secession convention was voted down statewide by 91,803 to 24,749. The final vote in Georgia was 42,744 in favor of co-operation and 41,717 in favor of immediate secession.

A nationwide revolution is more likely to succeed than dividing our country.

After all, we don't live in a black and white (err...Red and Blue) world.

Ok, Wyoming is a "red" state. Mississippi is a "red" state. Alabama...etc. I'll go with that. They always vote the same way on the Presidency; they always have 2 repub Senators; a repub governor; their federal House delegation consists of few, if any, non-repubs; their statehouses are dominated by repubs.

How about New Hampshire? How goes California...after all, that is where Freep-land PHYSICALLY exists.

County by county I can see a black and white effect...though some counties are too large and diverse for that.

seeing all the yes votes, and then those people talking about how divided we are and how much better of we'd be if we split the nation! Did it ever occur to you that it is this kind of mentality that is splitting the nation? This thread serves no purpose other than to promote division of this great country! Like it or not, there will always be red and blue throughout, in between, over and under, state to state and sea to shinning sea. There are families that are both red and blue, friends that are red and blue, communities that are red and blue - should we divide them too? Come on people! We are better than this!

but there's probably a better solution. Maybe we could reduce the power of the federal government and increase the power of the state governments. That would probably be the solution we could use. Let the fascists make their state governments totally fascistic, and leave the liberals alone. Break up the media so that there has to be local ownership within the state in order to publish. Destroy national corporations and make each corporation deal with the individual state governments, be they red or blue.

I have no problem with FreeRepublic.com, I just wish they'd remember that their right to swing their fists ends at my nose. If they want to fuck up their own backyard, that's fine. I would appreciate it if they'd take their transmission out of my bathtub, though.

Living in the belly of the beast down in Dallas, TX.

I stock my automobile with barf bags in case of emergencies.

So far I have always hit the bag.

As far as the good will or mendacity of our citizens, I can only say that people in Texas are pretty uninformed and appear to like living the clueless life.

Mind you, no flames please as I am a native Texan and feel I have the right to comment.

Personally, I am ready for the fight and the split.

The freepers can go live in the desert as far as I am concerned.

gimme a break

I just don't share your enthusiasm about splitting this country! You know, regardless of who wins, are you going to go out and beat up your "red" neighbor, or vice versa? Ultimately, Nov. 3 is just another day in America. We will talk with our neighbors, got to work/school, interact with other people, go home to our families and do all the same things as the other 250+million other Americans are doing. Regardless who is in the Whitehouse!

Or are you suggesting that on Nov. 3 we start wearing color bands on our arms so we know who to wave and say hello to and who to spit on! You guys are not being very American at all! This is NOT who we are!

if you think that I was suggesting that we split the country. I don't -- I think that's a horrible, misguided, angry, flailing thot.

further -- even if it WERE a good thot -- i.e., even setting aside the fact that we are the UNITED STATES -- even if we are a divided people, the very idea that we would separate into two different countries is a horrendous thot. The best thing about the US is that -- it HASN'T been totally overtaken by republican (or an single set of) zealots.

please don't vote on november 3, please vote on november 2, the 3rd would be too late! thanks!

In fact, I'd support giving them Texas, NM, Zona, Southern California after we split Cali into North and South Cali, Arizona, and we let them guard the border to Mexico. There'd be eleventy billion AR-15's pointed south in that case.

I bet that it'd be a chilly day in hell that before there'd be an influx of people heading from blue states to red states. There'd be ID checks and guards on the other side. You know the kids would want to hang out in the blue states where all the fun is. We'd probably have to have immigration quotas from red to blue, and virtually none the other way.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You know what, buddy? Just because something's old doesn't mean it's valuable. I have a 540 million year old trilobite sitting on my desk right now, and I bet I could get a whole $5 for it on ebay. Never mind that it's been through enormous comets hitting the earth, the birth AND extinction of dinosaurs and most of the large animals that ever existed on this planet, the breaking up of Patagonia into the seven continents we now know, ice age after ice age after ice age....

and you can get one for $5 on ebay right now.

Or, we could preserve a democracy by removing the fascists.

Just because the United States has been here for a little while doesn't mean that the best way to live is to maintain certain geographical borders.

Or maybe we could strengthen states' rights to the point that nobody but the hardest-headed conservative religious fascists would want to live around each other. Let them do their thing and live like that. May God bless and keep them.... far away from us. (credit to Zero Mostel)

. . .I disagree.

.. so have you read Ruppert's book????

Absolutely fascinating book. He's got the CIA mixed up with the drug dealers, our military arming the Taliban to fight the Russians, luring the Russians into an Afghan Trap, the oil companies using the US military to soften up the business climate in the Middle East...

Yeah, interesting guy. He hi-fived me when I suggested the surge in M-3 was due to Fannie May pumping up the money supply with bullshit ARM mortgages.

Hey, I just name-dropped! Wooo hoooooo!

....and it's a slog ....

better to "cleanse" Socal and keep it all since we will inevitably have to sieze the east bank of the Colorado and lake mead.

The country is headed for disunion or collapse anyway. Not because of "political differences", but because we have become a very real threat to the rest of the world.

Our ability to sustain being #1 and protecting our "vital interest" ($$$$) with military force will soon bankrupt the nation as resistance to our corporate empire grows.

We are now the rapacious rogue nation on the planet ripping off the rest of the world - and they're on to us.

Just a matter of time.

Or, we could split up into smaller entities and join the world community as partners rather than predators.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

To keep us honest, just like they need us. Things are currently so fucked up that a real progressive agenda is the only way to address them, but in the long run, it will be the moderate progress that will stick.

If we'd had a real leader on 9/11, we would not be the divided nation we are now. The question is whether we can ever get back to that point without having to go through the horror again first.

* "them" excludes anybody insane, as does "us"

that we can, but it will have to come from both sides. There has to be a true meeting in the middle. This country has been through some very divisive times in our history, but never did we say that we wouldn't or couldn't work together to make it all work. But it will come down to each side being willing to compromise for the greater good of the country.

I can't stand these threads.

I don't agree with my mother and father on politics but I'll be damned if those politics are going to come between us.

And that's just ONE example of why this kind of talk is moronic and dangerous.

Nail on head!

Can't imagine others find name-calling very persuasive. I know I don't.

Have you forgotten that the US as originally constituted was composed of only 13 colonies with 5 or 10 million people ? The very idea of a constitutional republic had NOTHING to do with a particular land mass and everything to do with respect for reason and the rights of others.

I lived in the South for many sad years, and I've come to believe that Lincoln, for all his greatness, made a big mistake. He forced people who don't apparently "get" the idea of a constitutional republic to stay within the union. Now the world is united with abhorrence at the monster Lincoln helped create. Either the US gets back on track very, very quickly, or its desireability so far as humanity is concerned is ZERO.

And I don't care what you do or don't find persuasive. Specifically since you disagree with me on this point.

In the Civil War.

Families were split in the Revolution too. Ben Franklin severed all contact with his own son.

But secession is not a feasible solution. If there is some sort of civil war coming, it won't look like any in the past.

For one thing, it assumes that everyone holds black or white ideas about politics and culture, and that obviously isn't true. Shall we have a third country for the moderate Dems, one for the traditional conservatives, one for the Greens...?

Hell, we have 50 states why not make them all countries? Why not go beyond that and slice up obnoxiously big states into many smaller countries? Let's divide into 280,000,000 mini countries so we can all be dictators or Presidents or whatever.


I voted No.

Besides, I'd be in the wrong part.

In France and Germany (yes, those two nations I'm pointing at), for example, there are rightwing parties, too. They get along just fine with leftwing parties, and they're not talking about fragmenting their countries along ideological lines. Why is that?

I think the answer to the question is that people over there are happier with the governments than we are as a whole. They have a more refined system when it comes to responding to the will of the people. There is no such thing as an Electoral College, and all their elections have run-off votes or IRV in case no one gets a majority. Also, many nations have fully subsidized election systems. The money comes from taxpayers, not special interest groups. Also, many use proportional representation where seats in government are awarded according to the percentage each party won. This coupled with run-offs easily allows a diverse political culture.

Because the government is more responsive to the people, the government also is more responsive to the needs of the people as well. Many of these countries, especially European countries, have better health care, education, environmental standards, etc. than the US does. Also, and of worthy note, many of these countries have stronger regulations dealing with media consolidation. If people watch television news, then the least the government can do is ensure that it does not fall into the hands of those who would put money and power ahead of the people.

The news media plays a part in the reason why so many people are misinformed.

sounds and looks good from afar, but is America ready to change it's political culture? Perhaps we will be forced to. I would rather see a reform before a split.

From browsing the two threads in my original message, I wanted to get an approximate idea of the opinion of the wider DU. All I wanted was some debate on the subject. In my original message I didn't state my personal opinion because I didn't want it to flame-bait. For those attacking me, please bother to read the 2nd thread where I posted my opinion before making assumptions.

1. The U.S. was founded on individual liberties, including political freedom. People from every background came here, voluntarily or involuntarily, or were already here. We were founded as a politically diverse and culturually diverse nation.
2. There are Democrats everywhere. There are Republicans everywhere. Were there any counties where either Bush or Gore got less than 10% of the vote? Wasn't the usuaul divide less than 60/40? Even though in some areas, it seems like everyone is one way or the other, that usually isn't the case.
3. Political dissent is an important part of Democracy.

Truly, if Bush were to win this election I would not want to be considered an American, at least for a while. I'd be honestly ashamed of this country. On the upside, if Kerry wins, I think he'll be able to do better at uniting, rather than dividing. I don't mean it'll be one "big union with peacock feather dues*" but I think there could be less venom after a couple of years.




*Slum Goddess, The Fugs

...its not as clean cut...slave slate vs free state....

its more nationwide...which means we will not have a true "shooting war" ..it will be just a cultural and political struggle and one side will overwhelmingly win, or there will be sort of a compromise reached.

Let Alabama, Mississippi et al become a third world theocracy on their own.

In the interest of territorial integrity and skiing, hold onto the Rocky Mountain states.

I'm tired of being told I'm not a 'real American' because I am a California liberal Democrat.

I say fine, you go ahead and elect unreconstructed theocratic fascists, and we'll elect our own progressive intellectuals.

Or, to put it another way, any country in which a Wiccan can't get elected to public office is no Democracy.

Fine words from the state that gave us Nixon & Reagan.

You really think all the folks in Bakersfield & Fresno think just like you?

More divisive, disruptive garbage; this topic comes up all too often. Sorry, we're working on an election here.

People who think the teams in the culture war divide along some abstract border between, e.g., Arizona and California, or Oregon and Idaho, or Virginia and Maryland, or Minnesota and North Dakota are missing the point. This is not Red State vs. Blue State, North vs. South, Confederacy vs. Union....

It's Urban Vs. Rural!!!!

Take a drive from the heart of a city of, say, 200k+ out through the burbs into the farmland and the small towns, and you can watch the cultural influences and preferences change with the milestones. Doesn't matter what direction you travel, you'll find the same theme everywhere. And even then, it's not absolute: there are bleeding-heart liberals in the sticks and vicious conservatives in the heart of the metropolis, but the overall balance is what changes.

Try this experiment sometime. Grab a copy of the popular "red vs. blue" county map from the 2000 election, and compare it with one of those sattelite photos of North America at night. It's pretty amazing. The "thousand points of light" are exactly where the Gore voters live.

There is no Mason-Dixon line, no "slave territory" and "free territory" to quarrel over, just varying concentrations of population. We may not like each-other, but we need each-other and we'd better learn to live with each-other. The idea of some kind of ideological apartheid is preposterous.

the 1st thing the republican republic wd do is declare war on us. it's their only diplomacy.

Most black folks still live in the south. Do you propose a return to the apartheid of the not-so-distant past with no recourse to a federal government. Do you propose a choice between endurance of oppression or violent resistance. Don't think for a second that thoughts of a final solution don't linger in the recesses of many minds. What about GLBT people in the south, Jews, women who don't want to be submissive? This thought that the "freeper" tendencies of the south are worth condemning everyone else who lives there to a more difficult life at best is disgusting. Even though we are still working on getting it right, we Americans are still all in this together, or was the Civil War for nothing at all.

Sometimes they start by saying the Civil War was a bad idea. They add that the war wasn't really about slavery, which would have ended eventually. Bullshit. The South seceded because the wealthy Southerners wanted the right to keep slaves & to spread slavery to the West. And the one positive result of that dreadful conflict was the end of slavery--a very real evil.

Many African-Americans still live in the South. They have faced difficulties, but other parts of the country are not exactly racism free. And many of them have built fine lives here in the land their ancestors were working when mine were still in County Galway. Of course, Texas also has many Mexican-Americans--some, again, whose people have been here a very long time. Cutting off this part of the USA would definitely increase the whiteness quotient in the remainder.

There are more Kerry signs in my neighborhood than those other ones & Sheila Jackson Lee is my representative. They ain't making Yankees like General Sherman any more.

boy, I'm getting tired of this. What a bunch of thoughtless, inconsiderate bastards. Even in bad years red state poll 30-40% democratic. I think these holier-than-thous are going to be surprised by the results this year. Some of my neighbors might not be "card carrying members of the ACLU" but they know when they're being reamed and hate being lied to.
And a special thanks to Jim Demented for showing the people of SC what repubs are all about. Twenty three cent sales tax, indeed!

There are unanswered questions from the Civil War. The north won by force of arms. But that doesn't prove the north was right. And there are a lot of people who still wish the south had won. I see plenty of confed flags in central PA.

Until we as a nation agree on which side was right and which was wrong, the war will be still going on - if only in friendly debates like this one.

*For nitpickers: I am using general terms because this is a message forum, not a dissertation.

Am I living in some kind of parallel universe where I actually get along with my political opponents and appreciate their opinions?

I get the impression that secession is mainly supported by paranoid-delusionals and oblivious nincompoops.

edit: changed some text

First off, if we divide in two, red vs blue states, you're going to have massive relocation as people move between the two, causing lots of problems, from housing, to jobs, to time and money lost.

Second, large economic problems. As a whole country, we are self sufficient of food and other essentials, outside of energy. Divided, neither resulting country would be self sufficient, and the country resulting from the blue states would probably come out on the short end, due to the lack of sufficient farm land. Most of our food comes from red states in the midwest. If we split, we'll lose the bread basket, with no means of making up the difference. And while the blue states would initially have the edge in manufacturing, the red states could easily make up that difference.

Third, this could easily lead to the balkanization of the continent. States that are dissatisfied with their new country could cite precedence and go off on their own. In addition, knowing the mindset of the red state folks, continous war for resources could and probably would break out.

Fourth, neither the blue, nor red states are contingous, thus making it difficult to form a country from a geographic POV. While having a couple of states unjoined as we do now is a small deal in our large country, having a group of states seperated from the rest of the country would be difficult. Tariffs, border problems, etc, would develop.

All around, as much as we disagree with our conservative counterparts, splitting the country simply isn't the wise thing to do. Both resulting countries would probably fail, thus throwing the entire continent into anarchy and chaos. Also, remember that both resulting countries would be just as war happy as we are now, and would probably evolve into a cold war type standoff with each other, complete with nukes. An interstate nuclear war could easily be the result, thus turning the entire continent into a wasteland.

It would be better and more fruitful to get along with each other. Over the past fifty years we have allowed ourselves to become divided over issues both small and large. We should work towards reconciling our differences with our neighbors, find the common ground that we have and build on it in order to heal this rift we find yawning before us. Any other course will result in disaster.

If the freepers can't deal with Kerry being President, then they should leave, and by that I don't mean secession, I mean they should just leave & go and live somewhere that will take them. Iraq, maybe.

They get to inflict their bullshit on us for most of my life, and when we finally get control, they get to take their marbles and leave?! Fuck that. I want some payback.

Fighting against seccession.

If the question is serious, then the answers should be too.

It isn't a Red State-Blue State divide. It is an urban-rural divide. Most of the major population centers went for Gore. Most of the rural areas went for Bush.

Very hard to divide that up.

Here is a link to the map. Sorry that it is from a RW site, but that if the first thing that I found when I searched for it. Anyway, even if the site is RW, it is still the same map.

http://fs.huntingdon.edu/jlewis/Outlines/BushCountyMapMandate.htm