Is it time? The case for a soft secession.

[paleotn]

I think the reichwing would just as soon be rid of us as we want to be rid of them. After all, it's not about territory. It's about ideology. Just some thoughts to run by any magat relatives you may still be in contact with this holiday season. Yes, I know. Putin's wet dream, but a second America, aligned solidly with our rich European and East Asian allies, may be more than he bargained for. The globe has realigned politically more times than you can count. Why is our time any different?

If the United States was a couple, any sane therapist would tell them to get a divorce before even worse domestic violence broke out. The two sides fight over the same sorts of things couples do: the kids, religion, what’s on TV, who makes more money. Beneath it all are seemingly irreconcilable differences. The two sides hate each other, are incapable of communicating anymore, and find each other’s demands and vision for where the marriage goes completely unacceptable. Worse, the GOP’s open infatuation with competitive authoritarianism is like a man telling his wife he plans on chaining her up in the basement so he can go “full time” with his Hungarian mistress.

From a year ago, but still poignant. More so in my mind. It won't be pretty, but I think it will be cathartic. It's time to leave. I'm done with them.

https://newrepublic.com/article/168784/democrats-preparing-worst-republican-minoritarian-rule

[kozar]

1. Its simple, i strongly disagree,

How would you move Dems, who live in the south, north? And the Rs to the south?
Is it my cost?
I served in Army, for all 50 states, back then, we didn't talk politics, we just did our job.



Koz

[paleotn]

4. Same here. The world changed on us.

[wnylib]

21. You don't move people. They move themselves

to where they want to live.

Such relocations have gone on before in history. During the religious wars in Europe over the Reformation, especially in Germany which was not yet a politically unified country, people had to accept the religion of the local prince or noble who ruled their region. So they relocated with the general trend being that southern German states were Catholic and northern ones were Protestant. But if a ruler converted or died and was replaced by someone from a different religious faith, people did not want to relocate yet again. So a small step in religious tolerance developed that allowed people who were a minority in their region to keep their own faith.

Other historical moves were the migration of Britons to France when the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain, resulting in the French peninsula called Brittany.

Celtic tribes moved west into Wales when the Romans invaded Britain.

[paleotn]

87. The partition of India.

[Cirsium]

93. Sometimes people are moved

Sometimes large numbers of people have been moved. The Armenians, the Jews, African slaves, indigenous peoples in North America...

[leftyladyfrommo]

82. That's what we do in KCMO. we don't

talk politics or religion.

[enid602]

2. Debt

How do you divide up the rather considerable national debt?

[paleotn]

3. We can figure it out.

Or default. Trump's going to crash the world economy anyway. So what the hell?

[Aristus]

5. Give it all to the red states.

We Blue States have been propping them up since the Civil War. Besides, they're used to debt. Their bad fiscal management is why the standard of living up there in Squalor Holler never gets any better.

[onenote]

7. How do we do that if we're the minority?

[Aristus]

9. We'll just say we're taking half, and still give it all to them.

I wouldn't put a lot of faith in their math skills.

[paleotn]

17. We're not the minority. That's the thing.

If given a chance to live in a sane American or Trumpmainia, I think even mildly Trump voters will chose our side. Certainly after a couple years of chaos. You'd figure they'd have learned. Apparently they're slow learners.

[onenote]

18. We'll be in the minority if the issue is secession.

[kozar]

10. I agree ,

But I live in a red state, and I take care of my responsibilities, on my own.
We are still, the ,
United States of America.
Should we build a Berlin Wall?
Between north and south?

Koz

[brush]

70. It won't be a north/south divide but as President U. S. Grant said in during is presidency...

"it won't be above and below a Mason line and a Dixon line,but between patriotism and intelligence on one side, and superstition, ambition, and ignorance on the other."

As for the geographic divide, that'll be near-impossible because as Pres. Grant said, there's no dividing line as the red states and blue states are not contiguous. Within nation migrations have happen often in history before. It would be nice if blue state populations would all move to the west coast states and then annex with Canada and say adios red MFers.You can have it.

Just a fantasy. We can leave it al to them. How would they replace all the money the blue states contribute to the government that then goes to subsidize the poor red states?

[Polybius]

62. The new country starts at zero

We did.

[kansasobama]

89. New country will not start at zero

California is the 7 th largest economy in the world. USA is nothing without CA.

[Polybius]

90. But the dept will start at zero, unless it is negotiated in the breakup

Gonna have to get a new currency too, unless we made an Amero. The Cali coin does have a nice ring though.

[onenote]

6. Where would my state, Virginia, end up?

We have a Repub governor, Lt.Gov, and Attorney General. The Democrats have just two vote majorities in the state Senate and State House. But we voted for Harris over Trump.

What about Wisconsin? It has a Democratic Governor and one Democratic US Senator who was just re-elected. It's state legislature is dominated by repubs, but the state voted for Biden in 2020, but narrowly for Trump in 2024. Is it part of this "secession"?

I could go on but I think you can tell that my answer is no, secession, soft or otherwise, is not the answer

[paleotn]

8. Then what is? We simply can't live together anymore.

[kansasobama]

14. Do we compromise and live with fascists who suppress us?

Is that the deal?

[wnylib]

22. People in the states that you mentioned

would decide which way to go, maybe by a vote. The minority in that vote could stay and adjust or relocate.

[kelly1mm]

30. What makes you think the 'split' would be by states? Much more likely to be cities and inner ring suburbs vs

90% of the land mass of the rest of the state. 'Blue America' would be a series of city states. It is also just a logical extension of the argument for leaving the US itself. Why should 'Red' Wisconsin be ruled by Madison, Milwaukee and Green Bay? Why should Dallas, El Paso, Houston, San Antonio, Austin be ruled by 'Red Texas'?

[onenote]

52. What makes you think what you suggest is possible in the real world?

[kelly1mm]

54. Oh I don't think ANY of this secession talk is possible. I do think as a thought exercise it is

Last edited Thu Nov 28, 2024, 01:50 AM - Edit history (1)

funny to think that 'blue' states think they could/would control vast stretches of 'red' territory within their claimed state borders given the realities of counter insurgency doctrine.

I think it is MUCH more likely (although still unlikely) that an Article 5 Convention is called.

[wnylib]

75. You asked, "Why would the split be by states?"

Last edited Thu Nov 28, 2024, 03:41 AM - Edit history (1)

Because they are already existing political entities, with governments and leadership.

But, the rural vs. urban divisions that you pointed out are significant. I am in a blue state (NY), but in a very red rural county. So, perhaps the cities would be isolated entities and, geographically, state divisions would not work. The people in red areas of NY would rebel in violent uprisings if the state joined together with other blue states.

Geographical political splits are rarely peaceful. If there is no split, and the red and blue states remain united as one country, will that be more peaceful? I don't know. If MAGA policies become too damaging and #45 carries out his threat to deny funds to states that don't comply with his policies, will there be rebellions in those states? And what form would those rebellions take?

Is the US too large to govern as a single republic? Other geographically large countries, like Russia and China, are dictatorships, not Democratic Republics.

The political divisions between left and right are currently too polarized to be sustainable for long. Class divisions come into play, too. On the right, there are billionaires who want to control everything and their followers who are ok with that. On the left, there are only a small number of billionaires and millionaires who are left leaning compared to the right. The rest of the left are middle and working class people who favor social programs and civil rights equality over the rule of oligarchs.

If both sides get more extreme in polarization, we will end up with authoritarian class divisions on both sides and no democratic republic at all. We will either be ruled by authoritarian oligarchs comparable to Medieval feudalism or by authoritarianism from the extreme left that mistakes sameness for equality and squelches individuality and creativity.

[kelly1mm]

77. I think you pointed to the problems of a state based secession that I alluded to. We no longer have a state

based identity (pre-civil war especially, the primary identity of many/most people was to their state first). Thus any secession by any 'blue' state would almost immediately be beset by at minimum a significant sabotage campaign and more likely a low level insurgency. No state or even city likely has under the historical 'opposition' element of 16-18% of the population that makes a government unstable per US Military counter insurgency doctrine.

I don't think that red states (or blue states) have many practical options against a central government that imposes policies they find damaging other than an Article 5 Convention of States.

[2naSalit]

11. So say that happened...

It would seem that once separated, the red states would seek financial help from our enemies and plant their militarizes right in the middle of the continent. I'm sure everyone will be down with that.

[wnylib]

24. Those militaries in the middle would have

democracies to the east and west of them - the Pacific Coast in the West and the Great Lakes region, New England, and Mid-Atlantic states in the East and Northeast.

It would be contentious and disruptive for a time, but what is the alternative? Accepting fascism for everyone?

[2naSalit]

27. I don't...

Have the answer to your question but I know it isn't secession.

[bluestarone]

12. Just watched a movie, The First Texan, with Joel Mccrea

These fucking texas RETHUGS don't compare to these true Texas freedom fighters!!

[kansasobama]

13. The seeds have already been sown

And it is the Supreme Court and the Constitution that has shackled us from a solution. It is sad, depressing, and scary. But, if you think this is impossible, wait till Trump starts converting the country to a Victor Orban style fascism.

I do not know if we are seeing the signs of secession. But, barring a rewritten Constitution, a revamped Electoral system that sees an end to Electoral College, at least a union of Confederate States is a solution worth a thought.

A lot depends on how blue states push back Trump. I am impressed with Johnston, Denver Mayor. Is he the hero that will ignite the country? If secession should not be a thought, Trump fascism needs to fail miserably. We should do all we can to achieve this peacefully. How will Trump handle peaceful Civil Disobedience? That may decide the future course.

All said and done, this generation will be laughed at in history. A beacon of democracy in a booming economy could not handle a mild inflation and decided to give fascism a chance. Really! This generation does not know what inflation is.

[paleotn]

15. I've called us the "Worst Generation." I stand by it.

My parents were the Greatest Generation. Amazing how far we've fallen.

[kansasobama]

16. I agree 200%

An immature baby generation.

[yorkster]

49. I think there's enough blame to go around.

A bit facile to blame it on one generation, imho.

[sinkingfeeling]

19. I recommend all DUers read the entire article. I agree

with the author 100%. I truly see no recovery for the US.

This is why I have limited my posting on DU since November 5.

[ForgedCrank]

20. Is this

really how we are going to behave when we don't get our way?
Really. Lets promote segregation because we can't get everything we want. We need "those people" to go live somewhere else.
This is getting embarrassing.

[Cirsium]

23. Can't get everything we want?

Last edited Thu Nov 28, 2024, 06:40 PM - Edit history (1)

You must be joking. I can't for the life of me imagine how opposition to fascism can be characterized as some sort of petulant childish wish that can be subjected to be ridicule and dismissed the way you are doing.

Yes, this is getting embarrassing.

[qazplm135]

78. The problem with fascism

Is we called Bush a fascist.

He pretty clearly wasn't, just a really bad President.

Trump would love to be dictator but it remains to be seen if he can actually pull that off. Until we does, it's a democracy. It's just one that's decided to put all branches of government into one party rule.

I fully expect the House to go Dem in 26. No matter how much you gerrymander, the 30-40 or swing that's coming will overwhelm.

So whatever Trump is going to do, he's got about 18 months starting in January to do it. He's simply not competent enough to turn us into a fascist state, not does he hire competent people.

He might want to Mussolini or Hitler, or Orban or Putin, but he's not nearly as smart as those guys are.

[paleotn]

84. Dude, they're destroying our country. Our democracy. The fundamental vision of what America is and was.

That's kind of worse than us just not getting our way.

[Fiendish Thingy]

25. There will be no secession

That question was resolved in 1865.

[roamer65]

32. Only by force.

There is NO secession language in the Constitution and the 10th Amendment specifically states that powers that are not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved by the states and the people.

[ITAL]

59. The Supreme Court ruled on it after the war

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

Basically, they ruled secession isn't constitutional.

[LudwigPastorius]

63. Texas v. White would have to be overturned by the Supreme Court, andI doubt that will ever happen.

[roamer65]

68. So they said of Roe v Wade.

[LudwigPastorius]

72. I never said that about Roe, nor did most who post regularly post here. In fact, its reversal was expected once...

Kennedy retired and RBG died.

The thing is the Republican party is about to be in control of the entire federal government.

Why would it want to allow half the country to secede? (That's even assuming that Roberts and a majority could be persuaded to rule in favor of that.)

[yaesu]

26. Feeling like I'm living in an enemy country I have no shits to give for fascist USA

but I will get my fiddle tuned up while it burns itself to the ground.

[kelly1mm]

28. Why are the people claiming to be in favor of this 'plan' thinking it will be split by regions or states? Blue 'America'

would be a series of city states - with some strings in the north east corridor and the Seattle-Portland corridor. The remainder (SF. LA-SD, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, St. Louis ect) would be islands. Interior CA= Red America. Upstate NY = Red America.

If you think Blue America will be able to control the territory inside its former state borders you may wish to review counter insurgency operation doctrine put out by the US military.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

46. Bingo

This is why talk of secession is always silly. Blue states would no secede. Blue cities would. And the cities ability to maintain control over their own territory would be tenuous at best. It's not like deep blue cities don't have a significant percentage of right wingers within them, many of which would be more then willing to cause all types of trouble if this ever came to be.

Most who think this is a realistic option do no understand how a modern insurgency would work, why cities are ill equipped to deal with it, and how easy it is to basically choke a urban area to death by cutting off food, fuel, water, and power.

[kelly1mm]

47. Logistical nightmare to keep the cities water/power/transportation networks up and running. Think

Berlin airlift x100 x 50+ cities. MAYBE CA could control the majority of CA by force but can they then airlift enough supplies to their 'Blue America' friends in Boise, Denver, Santa Fe, El Paso etc .....

And this is just considering general sabotage not even a low level force on force conflict in these cities.

[JanMichael]

81. Don't forget Greensboro, Raleigh, Charlotte, Durham, etcetera

And Asheville and others.

It would be like 1990's Sarajevo x infinity. Fucking snipers and morters everywhere.

No breakup would be clean and probably very brutal.

[kelly1mm]

97. For sure! I was concentrating on western cities (and big ones at that) as I think CA has the ability (although not the

will) to probably control most of their land mass and thus be a semi functioning blue 'state' rather than a series of isolated city states. Smaller 'blue' cities, especially ones not on the coast, will probably not even attempt secession. Hard to be successful when you start off surrounded .....

[hadEnuf]

29. The red states are nothing but parasites. The blue states are the ones footing the bill for them.

Not only do we get shit on for it, but now we get to be ruled by a fascist dictator who wants to destroy the government, throw Democrats and journalists in prison and give away the public's money to billionaires?

Yeah, screw that.

[TheKentuckian]

48. I don't think you are properly weighing how close some blue states are.

Kamala got 56% in New York. 52% in Jersey and Virginia. Minnesota 51%.

Then Georgia and North Carolina are like 52% the other way.

On top about everywhere is divided urban and rural.

Then if you don't forget the natural resources your obvious geographical line gets hard to work.

I don't see it.
There is no responsible way to go other than political or military victory.

There is no path to peaceful coexistence with a nuclear armed Dumbasfuckistan burning fossil fuels like mad fiends for shits and giggles.

[hadEnuf]

60. It's too early as the scumbags haven't even taken office yet anyway. Americans need their noses in the dirt

in order to understand what Trump and the Magats are all about. I'm sure they won't disappoint.

I'd still like to see the parasite red states not be able to dictate like they have been. Let them take their own medicine and not sleaze off the gubmint teat.

[Frank D. Lincoln]

58. That sums it up well. Succinct and to the point. nt

[roamer65]

31. Definitely time to switch back to confederation from federation.

Devolution of powers from the federal government, like Scotland in the UK.

It’s time to take the 10th Amendment for a marathon run.

From 1789-1865 we were a confederation, not a federation. We have been there before.

[kelly1mm]

33. Article 5 of the Constitution allows for the States to call for a new Constitutional Convention. However,

be careful what you wish for ......

[roamer65]

34. No convention required.

If it’s not assigned to the feds in the Constitution, blue states can do it.

[kelly1mm]

38. No, they cannot. See Texas v White (1868). nt

[roamer65]

39. It would take another SCOTUS ruling.

Let’s say CA holds a secession referendum. That’s where it will go.

Roe ended up overturned, for example.

[kelly1mm]

40. You get right on that then ..... at least you backed off of the 10th Amendment as your basis. An Article 5

Convention would be MUCH more likely than what you are proposing.

[roamer65]

42. No.

The 10th would be the crux of the argument in the SCOTUS.

There is NO language in the Constitution regarding secession. Therefore it’s all in the argument presented.

[kelly1mm]

44. You may want to read Texas v White. The 10th Amendment argument was presented in that case. nt

[roamer65]

50. Roe was presented in 1973.

Court opinions change with court composition and arguments get revisited, a la Dobbs.

Oh…wait…I remember hearing Roe was “settled law” in Senate confirmation hearings.

[kelly1mm]

51. Great! You are all set then! Have CA secede and run it up the old flag pole to see what happens! nt

Last edited Thu Nov 28, 2024, 01:49 AM - Edit history (1)

[roamer65]

69. Secede.

…and that’s CA’s decision.

[kelly1mm]

71. Correct. On both! Editing. nt

[FBaggins]

83. Why would this court change for the left to secede?

Heck - the ruling would quite obviously be 9-0 against the notion that states (let alone smaller political units) could secede.

[Hekate]

36. This is not 1865

[roamer65]

37. Nah.

It’s 1860.

Dump is rivaling James Buchanan.

Buchanan and Dump are the worst presidents in American history.

[Hekate]

35. Oh for gods' sake

[Yavin4]

41. When you look at the current state of public education and how they're shoving Christianity down students'

throats. I don't see how you're going to have a united country when half the country is uneducated and believes in myths while the other half believes in secular education.

[Yavin4]

43. The best and brightest young people will just leave the US before any split happens.

People will just pack up and move to other countries for better lives. No one wants to live under a Christian, uneducated, greedy theocracy, especially no one with skills and abilities. The best will just move away leaving the US with a small number of rich people and a vast majority of poorly educated, unemployable people.

[OMGWTF]

45. Living in a beautiful blue state I have always thought of our relationship with red states as a bad marriage.

Red states are lazy taker states who are never satisfied and are so GD ungrateful for all of the help the blue states give them. Fuck them. We are done. Lincoln was wrong.

[kelly1mm]

57. What makes you think that the split will be by state? Does your 'blue' state have areas that are red? Why do

you think they would just roll over and not succeed from the blue cities?

If this were to happen the most likely outcome would be a series of blue city states in, at best, a constant battle against sabotage by red areas nominally under their control.
Based on the US military counter insurgency doctrine, this would ultimately devolve into the blue cities being isolated and starved out (more likely) or a situation like the districts in the Hunger Games series with brutal martial law/military control of the areas outside of the cities.

None of this is likely and ultimately unnecessary. Just use an Article 5 Convention of the States to change/rewrite the Constitution (be careful what you wish for though).

[Baron2024]

53. Following

This is an important discussion.

[onenote]

55. Wow. Four years ago, we won the presidency with 81 million votes.

Last edited Sat Nov 30, 2024, 01:32 AM - Edit history (3)

And we won a majority of the House, garnering four million more votes than the republicans nationwide.
Four years later we lose an election by a few hundred thousand votes and the immediate reaction of a bunch of DUers is not to think about how we turn things around, it is to engage in fantasy fiction.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the defeatism displayed by some DUers is disgusting.

[Polybius]

65. I think you mean 81 million

181 million is incorrect.

[Celerity]

99. Post Roe overturn, in the 2022 US House national vote, we lost by 3+ million, nearly 6 million w/o California

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections

Popular vote

Rethugs 54,506,136

Dems 51,477,313


Rethugs +3,028,823

Remove CA (capped by the Electoral College in terms of impact for POTUS)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California

Popular vote

Dems 6,743,737

Rethugs 3,859,666

Dems +2,884,071

and we were outvoted by almost 6 million nationally.

[JoseBalow]

56. When do we get to eat the rich?

[Frank D. Lincoln]

61. How do we do that when

we're already in the rich's digestive tract?

[JoseBalow]

67. Make for the large intestine. All will be made clear then.

[egduj]

64. Borders are going to be tricky...

https://mediaproxy.snopes.com/width/1200/

[Polybius]

66. Oklahoma is the only state that is entirely Red

Even Wyoming has a Blue spot.

[kelly1mm]

80. Only RI and MA are totally blue. So what this means is there will be significant opposition in even solidly 'Blue'

states. Even more alarming is that US Military counter insurgency doctrine states that when 16-18% of a population is actively opposed to the central government that government is unstable.

[ecstatic]

73. the irony is that nobody would want to live in magat America,

but yet they keep voting for these cretins.

I would LOVE to see an experiment on this. Choose to live in Gilead or with the cool folks. Could it work without a geographic boundaries? Just hold a red card or blue card? Red cards are subject to Magat law and blue cards get healthcare, great education, college tuition, etc?

[Prairie Gates]

74. I like the outside the box thinking: Everybody says "We're so divided, how can we come together?"

You say "We're so divided. How can we reasonably split up?"

That's actually the right question. The "How can we come together" question increasingly looks like the position of the abuser, the angry husband. It's starting to resemble a "If I can't have you, nobody can" position. MAGA is an abusive and domineering husband.

It may just be time to get out of this marriage. Everybody saying "It's impossible" would be saying it on the micro-level too. Hoard cash and go.

Right now we're sleeping with the enemy, and they're checking the lights on the shoreline.

[live love laugh]

76. "them" ... that's the problem.

From a year ago, but still poignant. More so in my mind. It won't be pretty, but I think it will be cathartic. It's time to leave. I'm done with them.

[paleotn]

85. Tell them that. If you can squeeze some sense into them, I'd tell you to run for office.

Last edited Thu Nov 28, 2024, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

But realize, "Them" are the people who have no problem with your wife, daughter or granddaughter bleeding out and dying because of their bizarre religious views on reproduction. And God help anyone close to you who's gay or trans. So good luck. Sisyphus thinks his lot is vastly better than yours.

[Meowmee]

79. I have thought of it and mentioned after 2016 election in a post and another here recently

I don't think it's doable for so many obvious reasons not even considering laws etc. It's kind of laughable to talk about laws at this point since the orange psycho has broken them all and escaped any consequences as have many of his merry band of handlers and psycho-phants (yes I mis-spelled that into a new word intentionally-lol)

First you have many red areas in the blue states who would not agree to it or agree to move elsewhere and also blue minded people in red states who might be happy to move to blue areas or not, but who won't or can't for various reasons etc.

I for one am deeply, deeply sick of the whole situation and it was heading that way for me for a long time before it reached the current crisis. We are a talking about a lunatic criminal who murdered over one million Americans with covid etc. and who has now taken over the country with the help of a corrupt party, with a corrupt court to rubber stamp whatever he wants, and a bunch of crazy people who voted for him again, or for the first time. In addition bad actors who apparently want to destroy this country etc. are in the mix even more now.

I think, but hope once again I am wrong, but feel that is just denial of reality of what will likely happen, that we are in for a nightmare which I don't want to live through. I don't want to be held captive to this craziness anymore. I think the only real way to escape this lunacy and fascism is to leave sadly. Let them have the country they say they desire and see how much they like it.

The thing about fascism and dictatorships is they have to have a majority of people agree to it on some level and since large numbers here won't agree to it or at least won't be happy about the situation, what will happen? Look what they already did when they would not accept the results of the 2020 election. An insurrection which was not properly controlled even because psycho was in charge then and others did not act quickly enough to prevent the violence etc. I hope there is a peaceful way out of this and back into some kind of normalcy, if that is even possible after the craziness of the past few years. I for one will never forget the trauma of it all.

[Progressive dog]

86. "Peace iin our time"

First, MAGA are a minority.
.
Second, we have a set of rules begun over two centuries ago and they require much more than a majority to change.
Third, appeasement doesn't work.

[Sympthsical]

88. The Court struck down ISL theory

Fairly convincingly at 6-3 (and the three that dissented did so on the grounds the case was mooted by the state courts. Thomas' dissent is hilarious, because the man just cannot. let. it. go, and then he wanders off into the weeds of judicial review).

That said, we have an epidemic of terminally online people who talk with ease of civil war and secession, because in the back of their minds, they think they're going to comfortably sit back and watch the shit on YouTube.

Civil war and secession are ugly things, they will be in people's homes and families. Who do they think is doing the killing in this scenario? And how many lives will they suffer to be taken in pursuit of it?

And we'd lose. Certainly if the federal government is Republican. We'd be the Confederates in that scenario, and it would not go exceedingly well.

So instead of egging on a fight that people just assume won't particularly touch them, maybe don't?

It's bad enough online media idly throw out hyperbole for clicks and eyeballs, but agitating for a war that Twitter has no intention of fighting is just stupid. I don't know if anyone's seen a map of America lately, but this is what it looks like.



Yeah, let's go have that mess. What a fantastic plan. I don't know if anyone's met the rest of California away from the coastal cities, but if you think those people are going to suffer secession, either soft or hard, very quietly, you've clearly never traveled past Berkeley.

Some of these writers need to lay off their keyboards and just pretend they're serious adults once in awhile. These fantasies serve no purpose.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

95. Yep

And we'd lose. Certainly if the federal government is Republican. We'd be the Confederates in that scenario, and it would not go exceedingly well.

I dont think people here understand this enough. We would absolutely lose. Secession is an extreme view regardless of which side is advocating for it and if either side actually seriously pursued it, it would turn the middle against them. The secessionist side would be outnumbered. Outgunned. And would be crushed.

[Asa13]

91. As i stated in another post this is my home

Im not from the divided former united states I'm from the united states. I'd rather die like many before me protecting and keeping this nation together and put it back on course than give up and let what extremist conservatives have wanted since the civil war to take place.

[kansasobama]

96. Our Constitution acts against us

[kelly1mm]

98. There are mechanisms to change the constitution. For sweeping changes an Article 5 Convention of States

is the most practical (but most dangerous) way to proceed.

[cadoman]

92. politically it makes sense -- geographically it's unworkable

The simple fact is the political division is drawn at major city centers. The cities are overwhelmingly blue, the rural areas and suburbs are MAGAT.

You can't work out a secession with those circumstances without wandering into some Snake Pliskin plotline.

[Cirsium]

94. Yugoslavia

People who are saying that civil war cannot happen here because of this or that reason only need to look to recent history in Yugoslavia. Yes, there the different regions were associated with different ethnic groups. But there were a lot of Serbians, Croatians, Bosnians, etc. living in the "wrong" regions. The boundaries were perhaps less neat and tidy there than they are here now.

Neighbor turned against neighbor, almost overnight. The different populations were so intermixed and homogenized that the only way the militia could distinguish friend from foe and know whom to round up, torture and kill, was by the last names of people: Orthodox (Serbian), Muslim (Bosnian), Catholic (Croatian).

Once there is chaos or encouragement and fomenting of chaos at the top, the demagogues start ranting, and the self-appointed militia pick up guns, all hell can break loose in a big hurry. We are dangerously close to that point of no return.

People will say that there were ancient tribal hatreds going back centuries in Yugoslavia, and that we don't have that here. These "ancient tribal hatreds" only come into play when bad actors tell the people that is the case in order to ennoble their cause and spread fear. Typically they will say that is is those people over there who hate us and we need to deed ourselves. MAGA mouthpieces are doing that very thing, telling people that it is the immigrants, the liberals, the Black Lives Matter protestors, the environmentalists, the Marxists, who are coming after them, the "real Americans."