The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Should the United States Break Up?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my new book review in Taki’s Magazine:

Secession Studies
Steve Sailer

March 04, 2020

Frank H. Buckley’s highbrow yet quick and lively new book American Secession comes with the foreboding subtitle The Looming Threat of a National Breakup, but the conservative George Mason U. law professor and Trump family adviser is sanguine.

In Buckley’s view, a Trump reelection combined with Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death might trigger a Calexit movement by aggrieved Californians (a state where Hillary won by 4.3 million votes, while she lost by 1.5 million in the other 49 states) enraged at having to share a country with Trump voters.

Or perhaps the deplorables, offended by the Democrats’ smug “that’s not who we are” rhetoric, will call a new Constitutional Convention (which would require only 34 state legislatures) at which who knows what might happen… The last one, in 1787, tore up the existing Articles of Confederation and invented a federal system.

And would the U.S. breaking into two or more chunks be so bad? Buckley writes:

We’re overly big, one of the biggest countries in the world. Smaller countries are happier and less corrupt. They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily, and they’re freer. If there are advantages to bigness, the costs exceed the benefits. Bigness is badness.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 273 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. And frankly, while most enlisted are “red”, many officers are “blue”. So the military wouldn’t be quite as effective as it could be in any breakup.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.
    , @68W58
    O-6 and above maybe more blue than red, O-5 and below way more red than blue.
    , @Mr McKenna

    most enlisted are “red”
     
    Most white enlisted. Even that's changing, though.
  2. “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.

    • Replies: @Jake
    If the USA does not, then either there will be a terrible civil war, or else the Woke will have a fairly easy take over of everything and create a system worse than the Stalinist Gulag.

    And that means that the Left will oppose any peaceful secession. The Left is an imperialist monster. The Left is determined to rule the Anglo-Zionist Empire, which rules the globe.

    We do live in an Orwellian world.
    , @Kronos
    A Boomer style divorce/secession isn’t going to help with anything. If cities like Seattle, Portland, LA became independent city states they’d be stuck with their respective black underclasses forever. Gentrification is a national effort.

    https://youtu.be/HhZq7Hlc9q0
    , @Hail

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.
     

    I hope this post receives a lot more 'Reactions,' making it into an iSteve-commentariat poll equivalent; useful data if sample size bigger. And minimal risk of ballot-stuffing because it is a public vote attached to long-term commenter-IDs.

    So far running 6:2 in favor of a breakup of the United States (five Agrees plus TGTOD's original 'Yes').

    , @james wilson
    That's what they said in 1861, and they were right. Yankees had other ideas, still do.
    , @Corvinus
    “Should the United States break up? Yes. End of story."

    No. Period.

    Besides, your buddy Mr. Sailer brought up some salient points (finally). Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn...
    , @dfordoom

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.
     
    Is the United States going to break up?

    No.

    End of story.

    Why waste time on ludicrously silly and impractical fantasies? Even if those who own and control the country were willing to allow such a thing (and they most certainly will not allow it) there is no way it could be done.

    Explain to me how you think it could be done.
    , @Hail
    Steve Sailer Readership Poll on the "Dissolution Question," or the 'breakup' of the political-entity now known as the United States in its present borders, extracting data from this commentariat in three ways.

    Comment-2 being such a direct and simple reply to such a direct and simple question gives us a real chance here for proxy polling data, as follows:


    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.
     

    [Reaction button data] (as of 34 hours after first posting)
    - Agrees: 14, plus the original commenter = 15.
    - Disagrees: 5.

    [Comment-reply data to #2] (direct replies made to #2) (one to three of these are arguably trolls but will count them anyway)
    - 2 commenters seem to agree but didn't leave a reaction. (Subtotal: Yes=17.)
    - 2 commenters seem to disagree but didn't leave a reaction, + Steve Sailer who has not taken a side, but the contents of his Taki article suggest he is a push-comes-to-shove 'No,' = 3. (Subtotal: No=8.)

    Other comments
    Then there is the rest of the comment section. A review of the first fifty comments from people, not otherwise classified above, finds more express agreement (#5, #9, #13 [anon], #14, #19, #23, #30, #33, #37, #39, #50) than disagreement (#3, #4, #21, #43) with the sentiment expressed in The Germ Theory of Disease's proposition ("Should the US break up, 'Yes'"), by my count.

    (I am reasonably sure the numbers attached to posted comments are now stable; e.g., #50 is from West Reanimator. If someone is revisiting/checking this in the future -- good data for a graduate student project, BTW, if they'll let you accept the data; the fact that these commenter-IDs are tied to long-run specific commenters means this is pretty reliable data, no tricks -- you can do a full re-review and I expect your calls will fall close in line with mine, even if not necessarily identical; in any case, comments which are unclear, neutral, irrelevant, or made by people otherwise counted above are excluded from this third section.)

    Grand Total of all the above:

    28 people agree
    12 people disagree
    = 70% Agree that "the United States should break up," n=40 Steve Sailer readers who commented or 'voted' (via reaction button). I don't expect a larger sample will wildly change the result here.

    ________________

    Also note the negative reactions people had to Anon[289]'s comment deep-thread (his comment was possible trolling):


    I’m shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.

    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.

    Secession is treason. Period.
     

    Five of the six replies are negative/hostile, only one reply agrees with the sentiment.
  3. Smaller countries are happier …

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries’ citizens are so happy that they’re invading us by the millions.

    … and less corrupt.

    Assumes facts not in evidence! (And if Chicago became its own country, would that magically make it less corrupt?)

    They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily …

    They’re also more inclined to be conquered and exploited when larger countries throw their weight around militarily.

    …and they’re freer.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap’n Crunch takes over.

    • Replies: @grim prognosis
    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries’ citizens are so happy that they’re invading us by the millions.

    Guatemala- Latino vs Mayan; over 30 languages
    Mexico- White vs Mestizo vs Autochone; numerous minority languages in the south

    Both Europe and the US are getting tremendous amounts of people from places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon, which are ethno-religious witches brews of diversity.

    Africa from one end to the other is made up of tribal/ethnic/religious devisions in artifically-bordered countries.

    The truly homogenous countries for the most part, like Iceland and Japan, are not "invading" us.
    , @Art Deco
    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap’n Crunch takes over.

    One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes. There are a couple of dozen governments worldwide which have a military dimension. There might be a half-dozen military autocrats like Gen. Sisi in Egypt. (He's formally retired and favors business suits now, btw).
    , @GU
    If we simply went back to 19th century federalism and constitutional principles, a lot of problems would be solved. Maybe we split up a few states as well to better reflect shared culture.

    It wouldn’t solve the “diversity” problem the U.S. is facing, but it would still help to have Congress and the Executive branch keeping their noses out of local matters. Remember, before the 3rd world invasion, when the U.S. was 90%+ white, whites in different regions thought they were SO DIFFERENT from each other (see also European history). State and local governance of most issues avoided lots of bickering. The biggest obstacle today, besides the deep state not wanting to relinquish their power, is the mafia-like levels of corruption among state and local politicians and the public sector unions they serve.
    , @Michael S

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous.
     
    So are most U.S. states.
  4. Democrats try to pretend that it is about 1850, and PoC minorities and women (“black bodies”, “our bodies, ourselves”) are in horrific actual bondage to white male masters.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help (“right to bear arms”) and doctors don’t know anything anyway (“no, I don’t want to pay for national health care”).

    I found myself thinking about this more than a decade ago, when I noticed that the Republican and Democrat parties seemed to be in a branding and advertising war.

    In branding and advertising, you choose a mental/emotional division, on one side there are your customers and on the other, people who aren’t likely to buy your product anyway.

    What is the most emotional division our country went through? The Civil war. So, that’s how we brand in political fights.

    No, I don’t think a break-up is in the cards, mostly because the Left wants that power! All of it. Besides, would you divvy up the national debt? Divvy up the nukes? That would be great, California governors with their own nuclear weapons.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    If you divvied up the national debt according to population of red and blue counties, red counties would be solvent within ten years while blue would drown in red ink (due largely to their unproductive, parasitic breeders).
    , @ben tillman

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help (“right to bear arms”) and doctors don’t know anything anyway (“no, I don’t want to pay for national health care”).
     
    "National health care" means half the healthcare at five times the cost. Why would anyone want that? And why would anyone want to further empower the central government by handing it an extra two trillion dollars per year? It's elementary that "national health care" would be a disaster for white Americans.
    , @Ash Williams

    and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help (“right to bear arms”)
     
    The 2A was never about self-defense from criminals, you commie. Go fuck yourself.
    , @Neoconned
    Allowing governors control of WMDs makes for a great Ludlum novel ora "7 Days in May" type scenario....

    The CIA, generals and various ABC security agency spooks would never allow it though....

    We'd have a military coup before that wouldbe allowed to happen....

    My last post inthis awesome rabbit hole ofa thread....got work tomorrow and i think I've made my points....
  5. Secession is one of the most important issues of the 21st century. It is an achievable goal if we’re willing to work for it and not be intimidated by the short term breakup costs.

    The absurdity of our Empire was never more clear than when a Northern Californian, Anthony Kennedy, decided that 330 million Americans are required to live by San Francisco morality. Whatever one’s views on gay marriage, how is it possible that the people of Alabama, for example, are required to live like San Franciscans? It would be equally absurd for San Francisco to be forced to accept Southern morality (yeah, right).

    The easiest way to get the ball rolling is to push California out of the union. Make their lives miserable until they decide to leave.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers
    Those "short-term breakup costs" would be offset easily by redirection of funds which are currently being bled out (literally) by the $pentagon. Add in the rest of the federal nonsense, like Health, "Education", and Welfare, the Grand Theft Fed's currency devaluation, and a thousand money sinks funding tranny clown convicted boy rapers* and higher-ed navel-gazing studies and the new nation would be well-off immediately. Build a refinery and a thorium salt reactor and farm, farm, farm.

    * https://www.google.com/search?q=Tatiana+Mala+Nina%2C+is+Alberto+Garza&oq=Tatiana+Mala+Nina%2C+is+Alberto+Garza&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

    (Christ, even Snopes doesn't lie about this one.)

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/school-brooklyn-hands-out-drag-queen-training-stickers-4-year-old

    Let's leave. This script has been in the public domain forever, so let's use it again, and MEAN it this time:

    "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

    Even though these scum aren't decent, we should be. They don't respond to votes, so let's leave.

    , @teotoon
    Yes! Let us push California out of the Union. Let's give a hearty "welcome!" to the new Chinese colony on the west coast! My what a big new deep water port you have China; and what nice new shiny naval ships do you have; those newly renovated military bases are sooo environmentally friendly! what you say; the former residents of the old California were slaughtered to make room for the millions of new Chinese troops and colonists? No matter, most of them were evil Whites and we can always use the new Mexican refugees: lower wages you know. Besides the Chinese are smarter than those White goyim so we won't miss them; so our imported technology even better than before.
    , @Mike_from_SGV
    I'd like to see Trump arrest all officers of all the 'sanctuary cities' for their lawbreaking behavior. That would induce them to secede. This time there won't be a civil war, we'll be glad to see them go.
  6. You are right, Steve, to disagree with this wonky professor’s take. No, the US can’t be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.

    Secondly, this silliness about D vs. R shows the author’s lack of awareness of reality. 1/2 of Americans don’t vote anyway, and I can’t blame them. This is between the “deplorables” and the elites/their useful idiots/most non-whites and immigrants. (not all, mind you). It’s more serious than any election of the kind we have nowadays.

    The author’s example of a secession movement being started specifically due to some election results is also ignorant of reality and could only come from someone in the virtual ivory tower. Nobody will do anything serious on this until boxed into a corner financially, culturally, and just from the encroaching tyranny. The spark of this event could be a new law regarding more PC-woke crap coming to the schools, serious gun laws with the word “confiscation” involved, but most likely will happen after this Ponzi-scheme of an economy of ours has peaked out.

    People still have, or think they have, too much to lose to start violent movements* right now. Once they realize that don’t have much to lose, things will change. There will be some spark, and then all bets are off. I have no idea how this country can/will divide up, but there’s a book I’ve read on-line about it that’s a whole lot more realistic than Frank Buckley’s take. No, I’m not getting his book.

    BTW, the War Between the States was not simply about slavery, but I’ll let others argue that one. I did appreciate the humorous line about Andrea Dworkin!

    .

    * Yeah, well, that’s just it, the antifa are a crowd of losers who DON’T have much to lose.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I think the book I read before is this one - Civil War II : The Coming Breakup of America by Thomas Chittum.
    , @Bert

    No, the US can’t be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.
     
    As this fine-scaled map of racial residence shows, division occurs at the precinct level around cities, but most of rural America is still purely Caucasians descended from early immigrants. And such folks are the most capable segment of the national population when it comes to providing themselves with the necessities.


    https://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/
    , @Hail
    It is telling that one of the top-viewed political videos of 2019 from a minor/new youtuber male (not a million-follower, well-established person and not an "e-girl" politics-talker) was this one:

    CIVIL WAR 2 in America - WHO WOULD WIN? In-Depth Analysis
    1,706,656 views • Jun 8, 2019
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJh7Ye1Qvc8

    The youtuber, then new, is John Mark. He was motivated to start youtubing by the work of dissident-libertarian-nationalist Curt Doolittle and his Propertarianism ideology, which predicts a breakup of the US and argues for a serious overhaul of the Constitution and judicial system to end the "media-run state," argues that ethnocultural continuity is a form of commons that is to be protected. (John Mark and Curt Doolittle, of New England, met for the first time at the Richmond rally.)

    Curt Doolittle is worth attention re: a US breakup and what comes after.

  7. Anonymous[751] • Disclaimer says:

    Chomsky made an interesting point about the Quebec vote I didn’t think of.

    He said it was a good thing for Quebec patriots they lost because in actual fact independence wasn’t on the table because an anti-canadian Quebec would simply become an American colony by the laws of gravity. That was the choice: Canada or being wholly dependent on American interests to *let* you resist Canadian rule.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    Huh? The reference point for Quebec (French Canada) was (and still is) France, not the U.S., despite the proximity. I personally think an independent Quebec would have been better for both sides, French and Anglo, but it's too late now. Both are equally multiculturized.
    , @indocon
    If you talk to people in Quebec today, they are very happy with the current situation, with their language requirements they have kept out the hordes that are busting at the seams in places like Toronto and Vancouver, they have a very good trained workforce in high demand areas like SW programming, this allows their kids to stay close while still earn a good living.
    , @Tim
    I thought Canada WAS an American colony.
  8. About the money, or currency, I should say: I don’t see that as any factor important to whether the US breaks up or not. The US dollar will go down the toilet anyway, once enough people, mostly elsewhere in the world, realize that the cleanest dirty shirt is still dirty.

    On a short-term basis, anything valuable will be used as currency, but I’m thinking more of a SHTF scenario, something kind of likely in any non-peaceful breakup. For the long-term, you’re gonna have to start with something that IS money, and that means having your currency backed by gold and silver – what a concept!

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    Gold, silver or at least toilet paper
    , @Neoconned
    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-payment-systems-china-usa/

    The banks are terrified of ApplePay type services....

    In China smartphone payments have already replaced cash....
  9. A dream that would be make so many, so happy!

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.

    Imagine being free of the despicable Whites who hate other Whites.

    • Agree: neutral
    • Replies: @Jack D

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.
     
    Yes, in the long run Europe prospered even more once it was free of Roman occupation. The only problem was that the "long run" required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization. When it came to things like plumbing and roads, Roman levels were not achieved again until the late 19th century. If getting rid of the "despicable Whites" (each side thinks that the other side's whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I'm not sure the game is worth the candle.
    , @Neoconned
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

    When Rome fell the average height in Europe dropped by over a whole foot....im assuming from dietary disruptions caused by supply chain breakdown.

    There's strong evidence Rome's decline coincided with solar cycle caused climate change....the same as the Mayans....

    Europe didn't get its average height back to Roman era levels til the 1700s A.D......

    Perhaps America is worth saving....if only for the civilizational reasoning....

  10. @Achmed E. Newman
    You are right, Steve, to disagree with this wonky professor's take. No, the US can't be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.

    Secondly, this silliness about D vs. R shows the author's lack of awareness of reality. 1/2 of Americans don't vote anyway, and I can't blame them. This is between the "deplorables" and the elites/their useful idiots/most non-whites and immigrants. (not all, mind you). It's more serious than any election of the kind we have nowadays.

    The author's example of a secession movement being started specifically due to some election results is also ignorant of reality and could only come from someone in the virtual ivory tower. Nobody will do anything serious on this until boxed into a corner financially, culturally, and just from the encroaching tyranny. The spark of this event could be a new law regarding more PC-woke crap coming to the schools, serious gun laws with the word "confiscation" involved, but most likely will happen after this Ponzi-scheme of an economy of ours has peaked out.

    People still have, or think they have, too much to lose to start violent movements* right now. Once they realize that don't have much to lose, things will change. There will be some spark, and then all bets are off. I have no idea how this country can/will divide up, but there's a book I've read on-line about it that's a whole lot more realistic than Frank Buckley's take. No, I'm not getting his book.

    BTW, the War Between the States was not simply about slavery, but I'll let others argue that one. I did appreciate the humorous line about Andrea Dworkin!

    .

    * Yeah, well, that's just it, the antifa are a crowd of losers who DON'T have much to lose.

    I think the book I read before is this one – Civil War II : The Coming Breakup of America by Thomas Chittum.

  11. Anonymous[751] • Disclaimer says:
    @Redneck farmer
    And frankly, while most enlisted are "red", many officers are "blue". So the military wouldn't be quite as effective as it could be in any breakup.

    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can’t do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they’d have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn’t support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    • Replies: @Not my economy
    Doesn’t work if country people don’t actually have the balls and the organization to shut off the power and food
    , @ThreeCranes
    "Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you."

    Ah, but there's the rub. They don't care about those closed roads. Pericles' advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open. Landwise, all they needed to do was guard the long walls that connected Athens to her port, Piraeus.

    And just so is the fault line today. All the blue areas are ports with their backs turned towards the clodish interior folks. Their economic policy is one of free trade with their overseas partners whom they reckon as not only more essential but more worthy than their land-bound neighbors.

    This policy failed disastrously when the plague broke out and decimated the population of Athens, but of course, such absurdities as plagues sweeping through populations could never happen today due to our total mastery of the Forces of Nature.

    , @Futurethirdworlder
    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.
    , @Wency
    The cities are where the money is, and the troops will follow the money. The rural areas prevailing only makes possible sense in a scenario where the US military is first dissolved. American rural folk are not Pashtun tribesmen.
    , @indocon
    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable's in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.
    , @indocon
    Bay Area chokepoint is the 100 mile plus pipeline that carries water from near Yosemite to the reservoirs in Santa Clara county, it goes through some pretty red terrain in Sierra foothills which voted for Trump by 30+ points, in a hypothetical skirmish between blue and red America, this pipeline gets shut and blue America will only have Oakland's Black Panthers and Nortenos gang to fight the deplorables of the gold country to get this pipeline opened.
    , @Joe Stalin
    "One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist."

    "5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can’t do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc."

    Exactly right. That's why the biggest joke here is how VA militia should just surrender because the gun controllers have a NG in which they could just bomb and bomb and they would be defeated.

    Israel contracted decades ago with the engineering firm Sargent & Lundy to design power transmission towers that would remain standing if one of the legs were blown off. The US military attacked Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War power transmission towers with cruise missiles equipped with carbon fiber strands that when dropped on transmission towers would create a short circuit through plasma when they vaporized. Just think what modern consumer drones could do carrying spools of wire to the cosmopolitans waiting for their easy victory over red America in their Democrat controlled urban areas. At ground level, even a commercially available antenna launcher could be pressed service to knock out power transmission.

    The economic costs of blue America war on red America would be like in THX 1138 where it just wouldn't be worth it to the the State.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHuzVcfwE28
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDC_ecmQET8
    [1:50]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKcFNSgd6Q
    , @Anonymous
    California has natural defensible barriers like the Sierra Nevadas, along with sea lanes and trade links all over the world. This means it can be endlessly resupplied and easily defended. The same goes for the Bos-Wash corridor, with the Appalachian range and access to sea and trade links.

    The red states in the middle lack natural barriers and access to trade and supply routes. The farmland would be vulnerable to herbicides, napalm, and the like, and the red states would not have the trade links to be easily resupplied.

    So while the blue states are more urbanized and may have a softer population, logistics would be a major vulnerability for the red states.
    , @Anonymous
    This is true in the long run, however the big coastal cities are very, very rich. They can afford to withstand such a blockade for a long time by buying and importing supplies from overseas. They will probably capitulate in the end, but it will be by no means a rapid or easy victory.
    , @Alden
    The cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco own their own water and power. California has enough food to feed itself. The ranchers and farmers are ultra liberals on the question of immigration. California food, eaten all over America is planted grown, harvested, slaughtered, packed, processed, canned, frozen and driven in trucks by the illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians so beloved by California growers and ranchers.

    The food industry is the biggest importer of illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians. These importers of illegals include the Norman Rockwell farm family fantasies of conservatives.

    , @Jaakko Raipala
    Rural food production didn't do much to help against urban communists in Russia or anywhere else. Being tied to a patch of land is a weakness, not a strength. Farmers have always been under an overclass one way or another, from serfdom to tenancy, and the relative freedom of farmers in America is a legacy of colonization that made it actually advantageous for the elite to hand out patches of land.

    It would be risky for the rurals to push for independence precisely because the cities need the food and water. The urban elite would need to respond and they would no longer be restrained by political legacy, the constitution and all that. If there's a war and the urbans win, the rural rebels are not going to own that farm, mine or spring anymore - if they're still allowed to work there it will be as a serf, a tenant or a worker in a collectivized combinate.

    The fact that serfs produced the food with their labor never gave them any leverage over the lords. The peasants would of course curse having to serve condescending parasites who do no physical labor but trying to starve the lords never worked out for anyone. This transactional society where political elites actually purchase their food and water from people who own farms or water sources is a historical aberration and if the people who own the farms push their luck they may just lose them.

    There's no future for white people unless they can take back the power centers. Withdrawing to rural life is just preparing your descendants for serfdom.
  12. Thinking out of the box for a moment … WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    • Agree: BenKenobi
    • Replies: @SFG
    It's not just Kimberle Crenshaw and Ta-Nehisi Coates. There is the whole corpus of third-tier assistant professors and K-12 teachers in blue and purple areas spreading this stuff.
    , @Anon7
    You might enjoy reading about the Dissolution of the Monasteries by Henry VIII in the 1530's.

    ...religious houses in the 16th century controlled appointment to about two-fifths of all parish benefices in England, disposed of about half of all ecclesiastical income, and owned around a quarter of the nation's landed wealth. An English medieval proverb said that if the Abbot of Glastonbury married the Abbess of Shaftesbury, the heir would have more land than the King of England.

    A leading figure here is the scholar and theologian Desiderius Erasmus who satirized monasteries as lax, as comfortably worldly, as wasteful of scarce resources, and as superstitious...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Monasteries
     
    Take the proportion of endowments and public land that relate to useless "fields of study" like gender politics and put them to better use.
    , @Almost Missouri
    I don't think we need to fantasize about What Would Stalin Do. I would happily settle for What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity. And he did this with minimal bloodshed. If the Nobel Peace Prize were serious, Putin would have earned a century's worth. (But it's not, so he won't.)

    Now does the US Deep State have its own Putin figure?

    Survey says ...
    , @Oscar Peterson
    Well, Stalin would hardly be content with purging 100 intellectuals, would he?
    , @Anon87
    I'd almost agree purging officers would be a good choice at this point.
  13. Anonymous[647] • Disclaimer says:

    The U.S. has already broken up, but most people haven’t noticed yet. States are openly violating federal law (sanctuary cities and the like) and getting away with it. Federal immigration law is a dead letter because Washington can’t or won’t enforce it.

    The next step will be for individual states to begin negotiating their own trade and diplomatic policies with various foreign states. The principle is the same.

    • Replies: @Gabe Ruth
    Yes, this is the step that we need to take, and it's important to think about it and act intelligently. The most important point in Steve's piece read the observation that after the breakup, money will continue to flow towards NYC and SF. The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    Regional level protectionism needs to start before Civil War 2, and if it's done well maybe it could postpone or even cancel it.
  14. So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation – do Yankees or Californians really qualify?

    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail – whatever you think you are, they know what you are – their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.

    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of “Americas” energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern “America”. And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @OscarWildeLoveChild
    I suspect whatever countries are made of the former US (and it would be more than one or two) they will eventually engage in trade in order to receive goods from the shipping channels and oil and such. That's what countries do already.

    There will be probably 5-6 countries made of what is currently the US. The more interesting question, in light of Overton Windows and such, which newly formed legislatures, or those representing the proposed new country, overtly state they do not want non-whites in their new nation (or at least, no NEW non-whites).

    You don't create a new country based upon the frustrations of this country (many at their core which are born of racial differences, and immigration from the 3rd world) only to cord off a new country and create the same problems, demographically.
    , @Anon
    STFU Bad Faith Troll. You have understood nothing of Christianity. Start over.

    When we leave, we take 75% of “Americas” energy resources with us... And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday.

    Yes everything is 75% exactly. 75% of the people, 75% of the energy, 75% of the money, yada yada.


    75% of Texans go to church every Sunday
     
    Except that it's only 42% you lying, hateful piece of garbage.

    https://blog.capterra.com/church-attendance-by-state-how-does-your-state-stack-up/

    So many of these bad faith subersive trolls on here trying to pose as conservatives, it's impossible to correct all the lies. Leftist garbage have to ruin everything. It simply drives them up the wall that some others do not think like them and are actually decent ppl.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/if-i-do-get-the-coronavirus-im-attending-every-maga-rally-i-can-denver-communist-official-says-she-will-use-deadly-virus-as-bio-weapon-against-trump-supporters/

    Is this you TheMann? Because you are the forum equivalent of her. How many ID's do you have?

    , @Futurethirdworlder
    You are well on your way to being a northern outpost of Mexico and then you won't have to worry about those darn Yankees so much anymore.
    , @Corn
    “ Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast.”

    Own identity? One that will be replaced in 10-20 years as Texas goes blue and becomes Tejas?

    Will the government of the Republic of Texas enforce its borders, scrap foreign language ballots, and assimilate the foreigners within? Or will the Texas Dems and Texas Chamber of Commerce continue the immivasion?

    , @Futurethirdworlder
    How long do you give it before the children of Texas are taught the story of their ancestors heroic defeat of the Yankees at the battle of the Alamo in history class?
    , @The Wild Geese Howard

    And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?
     
    To expand on your point, I hope that the churches down there aren't racing to import as many Somalis and other assorted vibrants into Texas like they do in the rest of the US.

    In the rest of the US, the churches seem to favor the worship of Mammon, possibly Baphomet because they are addicted to the filthy lucre the FedGov pays them to import the Third World.
    , @Neuday
    75% of Texans go to church every Sunday

    What percentage of those services are in Spanish, hombre?
    , @Federalist

    Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture
     
    Texas culture is what?

    At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern “America”
     
    I love the sentiment and I'm on your side, but none of this ever materializes.
    , @donvonburg

    And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?
     
    I go in my garage every day, but so far as I know, I am still not an automobile.

    Texas itself is pretty polarized. Carroll Shelby famously said the difference between East Texas and West Texas was chicken salad vs. chicken shit. Austin is the capital, and is proudly one of the weirdest cities in the United States even by Texas standards. The only reason that it's still one state and not five is that they so far have agreed to stay together under the American republic/empire. That even could change.

    I agree Texas has some really solid Christians but they have a lot more of misguided ones, and a lot more people who go to church because it's the place to be on Sunday. The sheer heresy, greed, nonsense and plain insanity that Texas televangelists crank out on a daily basis is astounding. If you challenge the Prosperity Gospel message or the Christian Zionist, dispensationalist message in some places, you probably could get killed.

    And there is a major mestizo revanchist movement in much of south Texas, now that the gringos have built roads navigable by lowriders, put in electric power and plumbing and most importantly kept the Comanches from killing and eating them.
    , @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    LOL.

    Non-Hispanic whites are like 30% of new births in Texas, my dude.

    It's not 1927 anymore.

    Peak Boomer delusion. And by the way, Mexicans (I mean Tejanos) don't care one whit about your macho posturing about muh texan values. they just cringe and then pop out 7 babies and bring all their cousins over while you boast about 75% church attendance.
    , @RadicalCenter
    I admire and respect the real old Texas and yes, it had — and white texans (including many white and intermarried Hispanic Texans) still have the identity you’re talking about.

    But sadly, you and I are aware that decades of mass nonEuropean immigration has overrun that Texas as was intended. If the State of Texas effected secession just, say, ten years from now, it would be a majority-nonwhite, just about majority-MEXICAN Texas. Not the country I’d want to live in, though likely better than what most of California is becoming.

    Then again, just sitting and waiting ensures that the entire USA becomes dystopian California and worse.

  15. Late imperial politics by tweet, suggestion and various departments off the leash:

    Impotent in Idlib: US pits Turkey & Russia against each other with ammo offer, but remains irrelevant in Syria

    Except for lovely Senator Graham, the one thing not mentioned once in Scott Ritter’s article is: Congress. The child emperor and the administrative staff are running the show under random influences.

    The US is more finished than a turd in a clogged loo.

  16. Better idea. Breakup States

    • Replies: @Hail
    Breaking up a few states and disassociating parts of them from the United States, as territories without voting rights. Free city-states.

    Chicago out of Illinois
    Las Vegas of out Nevada
    New York City
    Obviously parts of California
    The Virginia problem (which may yet be the spark that begins the process of breaking up the US; it will all look obvious and natural in retrospect.)

    There are a lot of obvious choices. If all borders were dissolved today and redrawn organically, none of these places would be attached to the states around them. Many of these borders are centuries old relics, anachronisms.

  17. Yes.

    Secession RESULTED in America. It is inherently American. Do it again.

    “Once one concedes that a single world government is not necessary, then where does one logically stop at the permissibility of separate states? If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as in a state of impermissible ‘anarchy’, why may not the South secede from the United States? New York State from the Union? New York City from the state? Why may not Manhattan secede? Each neighbourhood? Each block? Each house? Each person?” ~ Murray N. Rothbard

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
    Sure secede down to the individual, every man an Island unto himself. But then how would you defend against an enemy Nation that looks upon this land of atomized individuals as easy pickings? Well you'd have to unify and raise the money to build a military.
  18. Yes, but it won’t happen even in a parallel universe, let alone in this one.

  19. Yes. And all of the immigrants of the last 60 years should be required to settle in blue states.

    • Replies: @Jake
    All of them? If you would take Quakers and Unitarian-Universalists and the standard LIBERAL United Church of Christ members who all have predominant ancestry in the US back to the 18th and 17th centuries over truly conservative - culturally and religiously conservative - peoples of recently arrived Eastern European or Mexican or Cuban ancestry, then you are a part of the problem.
    , @OscarWildeLoveChild
    They won't unless less legally required to, or left with no other options. States that are already overwhelmingly white (hard to believe they still exist) like West Virginia, could overtly state they are going to have a lottery, allowing say, 5 percent nonwhites to migrate to their state. There would be a deluge of non-whites trying to get in, including black professors that complain about "Whiteness". Non-whites love to live in white areas, and will do so unless stopped.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Fortunately, most of them are there already.

    So let us make haste before they get AFFH'ed into the heartland.
  20. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    If the USA does not, then either there will be a terrible civil war, or else the Woke will have a fairly easy take over of everything and create a system worse than the Stalinist Gulag.

    And that means that the Left will oppose any peaceful secession. The Left is an imperialist monster. The Left is determined to rule the Anglo-Zionist Empire, which rules the globe.

    We do live in an Orwellian world.

  21. It won’t happen. The US is an icon of global stability and the entire world would rise up to stop it. A million compromises would be tried and tested beforehand.

    A more reasonable goal for people of the secessionist persuasion is to fight for further political devolution to the states.

    • Replies: @Neuday

    A more reasonable goal for people of the secessionist persuasion is to fight for further political devolution to the states.
     
    You're right; too bad everybody equates States Rights with Slavery, which is the Worst Thing Whites Ever Invented. Why, the Constitution included States Rights only to preserve slavery! There was no other reason.

    Fortunately, when the dollar loses its reserve currency status in a few years, the Feds will be so bankrupt that power will fall to the states by, literally, default.
  22. @Anonymous
    Chomsky made an interesting point about the Quebec vote I didn't think of.

    He said it was a good thing for Quebec patriots they lost because in actual fact independence wasn't on the table because an anti-canadian Quebec would simply become an American colony by the laws of gravity. That was the choice: Canada or being wholly dependent on American interests to *let* you resist Canadian rule.

    Huh? The reference point for Quebec (French Canada) was (and still is) France, not the U.S., despite the proximity. I personally think an independent Quebec would have been better for both sides, French and Anglo, but it’s too late now. Both are equally multiculturized.

  23. Another thing: Italy and Germany for a long time were not nation-states, but a collection of different kingdoms. United by language, religion and geographical proximity, but not unified nations as we understand them today. In fact, I think that the concept of nation-state in the form of large multicultural democratic republics might have been an anomaly and it is on the wane, replaced perhaps by the historically more common city-state. New York is a nation of its own, very different from the rest of the U.S., like, say, Venice once was.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Another thing: Italy and Germany for a long time were not nation-states, but a collection of different kingdoms. United by language, religion and geographical proximity, but not unified nations as we understand them today.
     
    The United Kingdom is an artificial nation as well. It's much more likely to break up than the US. The only thing uniting the UK was that Scotland, Wales and Ireland were unlucky enough to have England as a neighbour.
  24. And the segregated US states could form a federation again, like the original European Union. Also join a NATO-type military Union.
    And we could start all over again.
    And are some people still dreaming of a white ethnostate, to segregate? The white ethnostates we had in Minnesota until the white Leftists decided to undo the ethnostate and import masses of non-whites with low IQ and high crime into Minnesota, as well as into Sweden?
    We are doomed, one way or another. There would be only way out: to abolish institutionalized lying, to abolish the #PCGagOrder and permit #TrueSpeech about race of criminals, as we describe in our website. We must demand truthful discussion and information. Without misinformation and deception, people would not give informed consent for insane immigration policies.

  25. @Morris Applebaum IV
    Secession is one of the most important issues of the 21st century. It is an achievable goal if we're willing to work for it and not be intimidated by the short term breakup costs.

    The absurdity of our Empire was never more clear than when a Northern Californian, Anthony Kennedy, decided that 330 million Americans are required to live by San Francisco morality. Whatever one's views on gay marriage, how is it possible that the people of Alabama, for example, are required to live like San Franciscans? It would be equally absurd for San Francisco to be forced to accept Southern morality (yeah, right).

    The easiest way to get the ball rolling is to push California out of the union. Make their lives miserable until they decide to leave.

    Those “short-term breakup costs” would be offset easily by redirection of funds which are currently being bled out (literally) by the $pentagon. Add in the rest of the federal nonsense, like Health, “Education”, and Welfare, the Grand Theft Fed’s currency devaluation, and a thousand money sinks funding tranny clown convicted boy rapers* and higher-ed navel-gazing studies and the new nation would be well-off immediately. Build a refinery and a thorium salt reactor and farm, farm, farm.

    * https://www.google.com/search?q=Tatiana+Mala+Nina%2C+is+Alberto+Garza&oq=Tatiana+Mala+Nina%2C+is+Alberto+Garza&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

    (Christ, even Snopes doesn’t lie about this one.)

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/school-brooklyn-hands-out-drag-queen-training-stickers-4-year-old

    Let’s leave. This script has been in the public domain forever, so let’s use it again, and MEAN it this time:

    “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

    Even though these scum aren’t decent, we should be. They don’t respond to votes, so let’s leave.

  26. Step One, from the original instruction manual…

    “Let facts be submitted to a candid world.” (Very long list of facts follows.)

    Step Two, also from the user’s manual…

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce them under absolute tyranny, it is their RIGHT, it is their DUTY…”

    Step Three,

    “NOW, therefore…”

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  27. Ethnic cleansing is most likely outcome.

  28. Unless demographic realities are addressed in this break up, then all further discussion is moot.

  29. @OilcanFloyd
    Yes. And all of the immigrants of the last 60 years should be required to settle in blue states.

    All of them? If you would take Quakers and Unitarian-Universalists and the standard LIBERAL United Church of Christ members who all have predominant ancestry in the US back to the 18th and 17th centuries over truly conservative – culturally and religiously conservative – peoples of recently arrived Eastern European or Mexican or Cuban ancestry, then you are a part of the problem.

    • Agree: Brutusale, Dissident
  30. “Should the United States Break Up?”

    Sure, but let each county decide its fate, as is being mooted in Virginia.

    “Dividing along partisan lines of geography would create an extremely complicated map with national borders typically drawn a few dozen miles outside of civic centers, inconveniencing surrounding farmers selling their produce in the big cities…. Millions of commuters would end up in a different country from their current jobs.”

    I keep hearing from Blue-County-ites that open borders are the best thing ever, so once they have us deplorables out of the way, there will be nothing stopping Blue America from having the open borders they always wanted. Red farmers can sell into Blue markets duty free! Red commuters can work in Blue jobs and go home to Freedom of Association neighborhoods! Everybody gets what they want: Blue gets ultimate globalist free trade, Red gets borders and ‘Murca.

  31. @PiltdownMan
    Thinking out of the box for a moment ... WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    It’s not just Kimberle Crenshaw and Ta-Nehisi Coates. There is the whole corpus of third-tier assistant professors and K-12 teachers in blue and purple areas spreading this stuff.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Right but these people are not original thinkers - they are just followers. If the Party Line was something different, they would fall into place. Better yet, just get rid of their jobs - who needs a Dept. of Sociology anyway? Let these folks get honest paying work as baristas at Starbucks. If we really need Sociology, we can start over fresh with people who are not sworn enemies of America.

    And the Chinese understand that you only need to kill 1 chicken to scare all the monkeys. These folks are spouting nonsense now because, not only are they not punished for it, they are rewarded. If you changed the incentive structure and provided a few examples of what happens to people who promote hatred of Western civilization, they would shut up right quick.

    The Whites in Russia thought that they could set up a few enclaves that could withstand Communist domination. This was not tenable and neither is splitting up America. The South tried that once and it didn't work then either. Or look at Taiwan (while it still exists). The Communists got the entire mainland and the right was left with a little island. Who is the world power now? The only winning strategy is to go for the whole enchilada. "Half a loaf is better than none" is false because the other side is not going to let you keep your half of the loaf.

    Now how do you go for the prize in a democracy when you have been demographically outnumbered by imported ringers? The answer (see Communist China, Communist anywhere) is that you get rid of democracy, not that you split up the country.

  32. I see this suggestion on left-wing boards as well, with titles like ‘let’s get rid of Dixie’ or ‘New England should free itself’.

    Thing is, it’s always more exciting to the 10% on the ideological extremes. There’s a large lump of people in the middle who are not particularly energized about politics, thinks we have a problem with PC *and* racism (80% answered ‘yes’ to each question in that recent Pew survey, so that’s at least 60% overlap), and wishes the pussy-hats and 4channers would disappear and leave them alone.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    It's not really that balanced though. I can switch on the TV and be assailed with the objective fact of PC/woke bollocks. While the 'racism' is largely mythical and anecdotal - kept alive only by enthusiastic media reinforcement.
  33. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    I suspect whatever countries are made of the former US (and it would be more than one or two) they will eventually engage in trade in order to receive goods from the shipping channels and oil and such. That’s what countries do already.

    There will be probably 5-6 countries made of what is currently the US. The more interesting question, in light of Overton Windows and such, which newly formed legislatures, or those representing the proposed new country, overtly state they do not want non-whites in their new nation (or at least, no NEW non-whites).

    You don’t create a new country based upon the frustrations of this country (many at their core which are born of racial differences, and immigration from the 3rd world) only to cord off a new country and create the same problems, demographically.

  34. Anon[414] • Disclaimer says:
    @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    STFU Bad Faith Troll. You have understood nothing of Christianity. Start over.

    When we leave, we take 75% of “Americas” energy resources with us… And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday.

    Yes everything is 75% exactly. 75% of the people, 75% of the energy, 75% of the money, yada yada.

    75% of Texans go to church every Sunday

    Except that it’s only 42% you lying, hateful piece of garbage.

    https://blog.capterra.com/church-attendance-by-state-how-does-your-state-stack-up/

    So many of these bad faith subersive trolls on here trying to pose as conservatives, it’s impossible to correct all the lies. Leftist garbage have to ruin everything. It simply drives them up the wall that some others do not think like them and are actually decent ppl.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/if-i-do-get-the-coronavirus-im-attending-every-maga-rally-i-can-denver-communist-official-says-she-will-use-deadly-virus-as-bio-weapon-against-trump-supporters/

    Is this you TheMann? Because you are the forum equivalent of her. How many ID’s do you have?

  35. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    Doesn’t work if country people don’t actually have the balls and the organization to shut off the power and food

    • Replies: @Jehu
    Not sure about the food, but shutting off power is laughably easy and wouldn't take much in the way of organization. Probably a dozen IQ 115-ish rednecks could do it were they to go at it intentionally, and nearly any significant city-country conflict will take out the power grid as collateral damage even if they're not trying to do so. It really is that brittle. Power (and water in a lot of critical places) isn't something that requires even 10% of the population to be in a revolutionary mood to interrupt, it is a lot more fragile than that.
    , @Alden
    Guess it would be rude to mention that the food industry is most responsible for , and most dependent on, illegal alien Hispanic primitive Indians.
  36. @OilcanFloyd
    Yes. And all of the immigrants of the last 60 years should be required to settle in blue states.

    They won’t unless less legally required to, or left with no other options. States that are already overwhelmingly white (hard to believe they still exist) like West Virginia, could overtly state they are going to have a lottery, allowing say, 5 percent nonwhites to migrate to their state. There would be a deluge of non-whites trying to get in, including black professors that complain about “Whiteness”. Non-whites love to live in white areas, and will do so unless stopped.

  37. Should the United States Break Up?

    The US broke up decades ago…it just hasn’t been acknowledged yet.

    • Agree: Federalist
  38. Bob Whitaker had a pretty interesting view of how power had changed hands in America, from the old plantation owners, then to the industrialists and finally to the education/media establishment. He thought things were shifting again.

    Bill Kristol bemoaned the rise of smartphones with their lack of gatekeepers on knowledge. The internet and Silicon Valley are likely to keep disrupting things in ways we can’t predict. Could be worse or better. We should be fighting to keep information available without “minders”. It could be a revolution that breaks free of the chains of the past, or it could be 1984 on steroids. But I’m betting it’s very positive.

    This was written back in 2001.

    http://www.whitakeronline.org/010804.htm#second

  39. Buckley and Sailer both are stuck in the civic nationalist and ideological rut. The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial, with resettlememt of millions to acheive polities that are more harmonious and governable. If you think such racial and ethnic resettlement undoable, you need to read more history. Post ww2 germans. India, pakistan, bangladesh. Czechia and slovakia. Bosnia, serbia, slovenia, croatia. And so on.

    The usa needs a breakup and reshuffling. And i am not alone in wanting my ethnostate.

    Peaceful beats bloody, but it needs to happen. Greg johnson at https://www.counter-currents.com/ has the most reasonable course of action.

    • Replies: @Liza
    @Roo.

    The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial
     
    One can only hope. Trouble is - where do all those millions of white liberals (the real bad kind) go??
  40. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    A Boomer style divorce/secession isn’t going to help with anything. If cities like Seattle, Portland, LA became independent city states they’d be stuck with their respective black underclasses forever. Gentrification is a national effort.

  41. @PiltdownMan
    Thinking out of the box for a moment ... WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    You might enjoy reading about the Dissolution of the Monasteries by Henry VIII in the 1530’s.

    …religious houses in the 16th century controlled appointment to about two-fifths of all parish benefices in England, disposed of about half of all ecclesiastical income, and owned around a quarter of the nation’s landed wealth. An English medieval proverb said that if the Abbot of Glastonbury married the Abbess of Shaftesbury, the heir would have more land than the King of England.

    A leading figure here is the scholar and theologian Desiderius Erasmus who satirized monasteries as lax, as comfortably worldly, as wasteful of scarce resources, and as superstitious…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Monasteries

    Take the proportion of endowments and public land that relate to useless “fields of study” like gender politics and put them to better use.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    So it was an advance for the monastery lands to be sold off at fire sale prices allegedly for the benefit of the poor but really to finance the King's wars?
  42. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    “Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.”

    Ah, but there’s the rub. They don’t care about those closed roads. Pericles’ advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open. Landwise, all they needed to do was guard the long walls that connected Athens to her port, Piraeus.

    And just so is the fault line today. All the blue areas are ports with their backs turned towards the clodish interior folks. Their economic policy is one of free trade with their overseas partners whom they reckon as not only more essential but more worthy than their land-bound neighbors.

    This policy failed disastrously when the plague broke out and decimated the population of Athens, but of course, such absurdities as plagues sweeping through populations could never happen today due to our total mastery of the Forces of Nature.

    • Replies: @ia
    Interesting analogy but the Greeks were all of the same race, basically, and highly patriarchal.
    , @Ash Williams

    Ah, but there’s the rub. They don’t care about those closed roads. Pericles’ advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open.
     
    That's great for everything not made in America, but the food's grown here.

    China's getting locust plagues now too, BTW...
  43. There will be no revolution and no civil war in country where 70% of population are overweight or obese.
    Deal with it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "70% of population are overweight or obese"
     
    Or you could look at it the other way around: with over 70% of the population perforce on the sidelines, you only need a majority of the rest (~15%) to win the revolution.

    Adams (as I recall) said he won the original American War for Independence with the support of only a third of the population. So today maybe 10% is enough.

    Fatties follow the food FTW.
    , @J.Ross
    The cheltingham wainscoting imposed on us by an insane elite determined to do so will be an Irish-style series or atmosphere of precisely planned targeted but limited violence and prankery by independent and unrelated people, a Harry Tuttle shadow career and not a Napoleonic martial campaign. Notice how the EU and even the Germans learned to respect Greeks after Greeks overpowered (but did not kill) armored riot police. Imagine an overweight but knowledgeable infrastructural worker messing with the infrastructure. In other words major parts of it literally could be done by the people in your picture.
    , @ScarletNumber
    At least she is being true to herself and not grabbing the diet soda.
  44. The avenue for a “soft secession” is already set forth in the constitution, more specifically the 10th Amendment. If you look at state marijuana laws, sanctuary cities and the growing 2nd amendment sanctuary movement it appears as if both sides are already moving in that direction. Effectively you work toward decentralization with Feds handling foreign affair and States handling domestic on a more localized level, i.e. apply the constitution as it’s written. It would take a generation and you’d have to have to reign in the broad interpretation of the commerce clause thereby cutting legislative branch wings a bit as to domestic policy and address other federal precedent but it’s doable – and it’s best chance to do it nonviolently.

    At the end of the day we have > 350 million people. In order to control that amount of folks you have to move toward more authoritarian government – which is what we’re doing. “Soft secession” using the basis for adopting the 10th is the best chance to real it in.

  45. “If America split up, wouldn’t money continue to pour into New York and San Francisco?”

    Okay, but how much of the money pouring into the coasts is just the fruits of currency manipulation, legal extortion, real estate scams, regulatory distortion, accounting artifacts, etc.?

    The phenomenal wealth growth of Washington DC, which produces nothing of economic value (indeed, arguably it inhibits value production) bespeaks what can at best be called a serious misallocation of resources and what might more accurately be called a fake Potemkin economy.

    Hey, if San Fran can continue to persuade Chinese oligarchs to pour dollars into worthless software startups, God bless ’em for as long as it (and their Tesla batteries*) lasts. But let’s not confuse accounting games and secondary markets with genuine value production.

    “what currency would successor states use? Would it be wise to give up the mighty dollar?”

    The dollar will eventually be giving itself up, thanks to the Fed. Indeed, this may the spark that finally ignites real secession.

    “But if not, how would the dollar be administered without a political union? The history of the Euro is not encouraging.”

    Eh? Europe did fine—arguably better—when each country had its own currency. Likewise, the US states had higher growth rates before the central bank imposed a uniform currency across the entire nation.

    “Note the hard-earned wisdom of a man who lived through the Eurasian equivalent of what Buckley blithely considers for America:

    Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century…. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and co-patriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself. —Vladimir Putin

    Shorter Putin:

    “Hobbling our ethnicity is bad.”

    If Blue America wants to make themselves into minorities in their own land, let them do it in quarantine apart from the rest of us.

    “For example, where, exactly, do you draw the border?”

    At county level, as discussed. Of course, since Blue America wants open borders anyway, borders are moot for them. Red America can trade and work in open-border Blue America at will.

    “In contrast, Southern secession in 1861 was over slavery, which led to a fairly linear border between the North and the South.”

    I hope this isn’t meant to be an argument in favor of “rational” linear borders. Cuz, ya know that what immediately followed the 1861 linear border was … the Civil War. (See also, all the “rational, linear” borders in Africa. How are those working out?)

    “Moreover, whites tend to become Democrats or Republicans depending upon whether they live in cities or the countryside. So even if Democrats ideologically cleansed Republicans from the rural Northeast and Republicans drove out Democrats from the urban Sunbelt, their descendants who settled conquered enemy territory would start turning into the enemy.”

    Perhaps, but so what? If the first approximation is no longer accurate, time for the second approximation, and so on. Self determination then, now, and in the future. We’re in favor of that right?

    No borders have ever been static over the long run. The only question is if they move peacefully or violently. We have a golden opportunity to move them soon peacefully. Let us not squander that opportunity and leave violence as the only alternative.

    “Consider America’s 11 big aircraft carriers, the foremost sword of American might in conventional conflicts. The U.S. owns 11 of the world’s 24 aircraft carriers, including all 11 largest, and almost three-fourths of the world’s carrier planes. The U.S. has more than an order of magnitude more aircraft-carrier-based warplanes than any other single country.”

    Gotta agree with The Saker: they’re white elephants that haven’t faced real combat in over seven decades.

    “red America would take on an even larger border with Mexico, while insulating blue America from Latin American immigration.”

    Yeah, Red America would be helping ingrate Blue America despite itself … again. But what else is new?

    We could always do what Mexico and Turkey do and just wave on through all of that luscious diversity that Blue America claims it wants so bad. I suspect that like Cuck Europe, they would rapidly discover that their welfare systems are all full.

    “My impression is that the U.S. military very much enjoys representing the strongest, most ass-kicking country on earth and intends to keep the USA that way.”

    Which is the strong horse: independent, proud Red America, or whiny, cucky, melangeist Blue America?

    “then the effective decision would wind up in the hands of the hard men of the military.”

    If they do military stuff like, say, patrolling the perimeter, what’s the downside?

    “military men like things just the way they are and have no intention of weakening America on the world stage by allowing petty politicians to split up the most awe-inspiring military in human history. Any appeal to arms puts the final decision in the hands of the warriors. And they are nationalists who value, above all, the unity of the nation.”

    Isn’t Blue America precisely who is splitting up national unity? So, should they let the infection spread until the entire body is lost, or save the healthy tissue and with it, national unity? Decisions, decisions…

    * Of course, those batteries are made in red Nevada, while the revenues are recognized in blue California. This is the kind of thing I’m talking about.

    • Agree: ben tillman
  46. @OilcanFloyd
    Yes. And all of the immigrants of the last 60 years should be required to settle in blue states.

    Fortunately, most of them are there already.

    So let us make haste before they get AFFH’ed into the heartland.

  47. @Herp McDerp
    Smaller countries are happier ...

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries' citizens are so happy that they're invading us by the millions.

    ... and less corrupt.

    Assumes facts not in evidence! (And if Chicago became its own country, would that magically make it less corrupt?)

    They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily ...

    They’re also more inclined to be conquered and exploited when larger countries throw their weight around militarily.

    ...and they’re freer.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap'n Crunch takes over.

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries’ citizens are so happy that they’re invading us by the millions.

    Guatemala- Latino vs Mayan; over 30 languages
    Mexico- White vs Mestizo vs Autochone; numerous minority languages in the south

    Both Europe and the US are getting tremendous amounts of people from places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon, which are ethno-religious witches brews of diversity.

    Africa from one end to the other is made up of tribal/ethnic/religious devisions in artifically-bordered countries.

    The truly homogenous countries for the most part, like Iceland and Japan, are not “invading” us.

  48. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    You are well on your way to being a northern outpost of Mexico and then you won’t have to worry about those darn Yankees so much anymore.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  49. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    “ Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast.”

    Own identity? One that will be replaced in 10-20 years as Texas goes blue and becomes Tejas?

    Will the government of the Republic of Texas enforce its borders, scrap foreign language ballots, and assimilate the foreigners within? Or will the Texas Dems and Texas Chamber of Commerce continue the immivasion?

  50. Calexit would be a no-lose proposition for the political right.

    Worst case scenario, the secession occurs peacefully and amicably and the political left loses all of the votes of the most populous state.

    Best case scenario, the federal government refuses to recognize Californian independence, invades, overthrows their government, executes their leaders, disenfranchises millions of Democrat “traitors” and rewrites their state constitution unilaterally.

    • Replies: @Marcus RUIZ Evans
    so a repeat of America to our CA in 1846 - when the Federal government invaded, overthrew the government, shot those that resisted, disenfranchised minorities from the vote. Hey, worked the first time.
  51. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    How long do you give it before the children of Texas are taught the story of their ancestors heroic defeat of the Yankees at the battle of the Alamo in history class?

  52. @Redneck farmer
    And frankly, while most enlisted are "red", many officers are "blue". So the military wouldn't be quite as effective as it could be in any breakup.

    O-6 and above maybe more blue than red, O-5 and below way more red than blue.

    • Thanks: Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    The critical ranks are O-5 and O-6, i.e., Lieutenant Colonels, Commanders, Colonels, and Captains. These officers have a high enough level of command to deploy effective combat units yet are close enough to their staff officers and enlisted men to command personal loyalty. I've read that when officers at this level become alienated from the governments they serve, the chance that the military will join a revolution or insurrection is greatly increased. The plethora of colonels who assumed control after government overthrows, e.g., Franco, Peron, Nasser, Qaddafi, Noriega, etc., lends some credence to this theory.
  53. I’m not opposed to break up or secession. Steve put it best though:

    White v. White

    Look the demographics of voting. Any secession is eventually going to work along racial lines, but whites are dispersed across the country. You can’t just vote to secede and create a white, right-leaning state when anywhere from a fifth to half of the white population is waiting to stab you in the back.

  54. “Break up!” you cry? How many chunks of the former continental US do you want to have as colonies to Spain, England, France, Russia, and China. Didn’t think about that did you; thought so.

    You think that there is going to be a Calexit?: There will be a the state of New California before that happens; over fifty counties support it.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/edtalkradio1/videos

  55. @PiltdownMan
    Thinking out of the box for a moment ... WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    I don’t think we need to fantasize about What Would Stalin Do. I would happily settle for What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity. And he did this with minimal bloodshed. If the Nobel Peace Prize were serious, Putin would have earned a century’s worth. (But it’s not, so he won’t.)

    Now does the US Deep State have its own Putin figure?

    Survey says …

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity.
     
    From a purely pragmatic perspective, Putin has been far and away the most intelligent and effective world leader of the past two decades. Whoever is second place is not even close.

    He was dealt an incredibly shitty hand at the beginning of his presidential career and overall he has played it masterfully.
    , @Jack D

    put it back on the road to superpower status
     
    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version? Putin's militaristic facade conceals a lot of rot. Putin was very lucky for a while in that high oil prices held up his regime, but without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus. And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?

    You have to say that Putin has somewhat stabilized the ship but what course has he charted it on? What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?
  56. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    I hope Red America does sell water, food and power to Blue America. Blue gets it basically for free now, and once separated, we don't have to buy all their Trannymania in return.

    Once the Blue urbanites' fingers are pried loose from the real means of production, the financial realities will more closely match the natural realities.

    This is how Russia keeps Europe in line. Want power this winter, Europe? Don't cross Russia.
    , @Realist

    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.
     
    Yes, greed rules in this country.
  57. Partition may become a question the general public gives serious attention to after Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory over Donald Trump, assuming Sanders isn’t the nominee. Although, I can’t say how many will go this way. My guess is that partition may become fairly serious late into the 2020s when the shock of Texas (?), Georgia, North Carolina, and Florida — or some combination of those states — going permanently blue settles in. Such a possibility was briefly raised just after Mitt Romney lost the presidential election in 2012. Fox News had fooled a lot of people into thinking Mitt was going to win.

    I knew an old boomer public transportation bus driver in a diverse American city at the time. Early in the morning, he was ecstatic — eagerly greeted everyone who entered. He was the kind of guy who, perhaps in a rivalry with the majority black drivers who often blasted black political commentary channels to passengers, audibly listened to Rush Limbaugh during his route. Well, he wasn’t so happy the next morning. He didn’t say a word to anyone. Boomers probably thought to themselves, “How could Mitt Romney not win? He did everything Reagan did — said all the right things, paid lip service to all the right groups: God, small business, freedom, defense, democrats are the real racists.” Well, times change. I’m seeing much of the same phenomenon now. A lot of people wrongly think there is going to be some kind of Trumpslide: economy, freedom, Israel, lowest black unemployment, democrats are the real transphobes. I wouldn’t count on it unless Biden’s medical records are leaked and they reveal a dementia diagnosis.

    Biden, despite being obviously senile, or in the early stages, will almost certainly win; last night, another embarrassing gaffe: confused his wife for his daughter and had to be immediately corrected on stage. The demographics for a Reagan-style GOP landslide aren’t there anymore (macabre observation: even moreso if this coronavirus sweeps through the elderly population with a mortality greater than 1%). Additionally, Trump will have discredited himself and the democratic process by ignoring the wishes of his 2016 base and running (and losing) as a milquetoast conservative beholden to corporate donors. It will be clear that no matter who the republicans nominate and vote for, nothing will change. Even if they win, they lose — and they’ll very soon not even get the fig leaf of “winning.”

    I’ve always believed Biden would be the more dangerous of the two candidates between himself and Sanders. The latter would push for a few economic policies that might peel off 2 – 3 % of Trump’s white vote, legitimizing his election and calming things down. The former will do nothing much while occasionally engaging in hateful social policy and rhetoric in an attempt to divert democratic party voters from noticing how wealthy the leadership is. That doesn’t bode well for reconciliation efforts. Despite this, the ruling class has apparently gone with the guy who’ll most preserve their pocketbooks in the short term. In doing so, the mask has slipped and revealed an insular, greedy establishment first concerned with their own interests ahead and beyond any kind of greater national concern. At least it’s out in the open now, for what it’s worth.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    You’re probably correct about a Biden victory. Vote stealing alone will probably be enough to over-turn 2016. I doubt that a push for secession will be an immediate result.
  58. @Morris Applebaum IV
    Secession is one of the most important issues of the 21st century. It is an achievable goal if we're willing to work for it and not be intimidated by the short term breakup costs.

    The absurdity of our Empire was never more clear than when a Northern Californian, Anthony Kennedy, decided that 330 million Americans are required to live by San Francisco morality. Whatever one's views on gay marriage, how is it possible that the people of Alabama, for example, are required to live like San Franciscans? It would be equally absurd for San Francisco to be forced to accept Southern morality (yeah, right).

    The easiest way to get the ball rolling is to push California out of the union. Make their lives miserable until they decide to leave.

    Yes! Let us push California out of the Union. Let’s give a hearty “welcome!” to the new Chinese colony on the west coast! My what a big new deep water port you have China; and what nice new shiny naval ships do you have; those newly renovated military bases are sooo environmentally friendly! what you say; the former residents of the old California were slaughtered to make room for the millions of new Chinese troops and colonists? No matter, most of them were evil Whites and we can always use the new Mexican refugees: lower wages you know. Besides the Chinese are smarter than those White goyim so we won’t miss them; so our imported technology even better than before.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Morris Applebaum IV
    Can always count on hearing the Adolfite point of view here no matter the context or subject. 'White goyim" " evil Whites" oh, brother, what the heck is going on in your head. I just want the climate alarmists, open borders, socialists-for-thee-but-not-me, 400+ genders, anti-religion, anti-traditional family folks to leave the rest of us alone.

    The point of breaking up the USA is to provide people with more options to live in a country that represents them. China is not going to invade California, that's so dumb it's not even worth discussing. I'm sure an independent California would be a nuclear power (until they unilaterally disarmed!). California, as an independent country, would have the 5th largest economy in the world.

    If Scotland can consider leaving the United Kingdom, what is so bizarre about California leaving the United States? These ideas should at least be on the table.
  59. We have a cultural war between Red America and Blue America since at least the 1960s, and things are not getting better. A breakup would hardly be ideal but at some point, it could be better than the current situation. As Blue America keeps boasting that demography is on their side and whites would become a minority within a few election cycles, perhaps Red America should cut it loose before this happens. On the bright side, Red America would be (most probably) a contiguous nation. Blue America would be fractured geographically into (at least) two chunks, one in the Northeast and the other in the Pacific coast.

  60. @Anon7
    Democrats try to pretend that it is about 1850, and PoC minorities and women ("black bodies", "our bodies, ourselves") are in horrific actual bondage to white male masters.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help ("right to bear arms") and doctors don't know anything anyway ("no, I don't want to pay for national health care").

    I found myself thinking about this more than a decade ago, when I noticed that the Republican and Democrat parties seemed to be in a branding and advertising war.

    In branding and advertising, you choose a mental/emotional division, on one side there are your customers and on the other, people who aren't likely to buy your product anyway.

    What is the most emotional division our country went through? The Civil war. So, that's how we brand in political fights.

    No, I don't think a break-up is in the cards, mostly because the Left wants that power! All of it. Besides, would you divvy up the national debt? Divvy up the nukes? That would be great, California governors with their own nuclear weapons.

    If you divvied up the national debt according to population of red and blue counties, red counties would be solvent within ten years while blue would drown in red ink (due largely to their unproductive, parasitic breeders).

    • Agree: ben tillman
  61. Does Buckley mention Medicare and Social Security anywhere in his book? Breaking up the country isn’t very practical as long as these entitlements are paying benefits to seniors. No matter how mad voters are, they aren’t going to vote away benefits they are currently getting without a clear plan to continue getting them from the new government. As state boundaries would reorganize, there would also be the fights over water and mineral rights to consider.

  62. Anon[349] • Disclaimer says:

    Breaking up the US suffers from the same problem that recent proposals to establish from scratch one or more new full-blown, but non-woke, universities, funded by a conservative billionaire. Short of some sort of apartheid, how do you prevent eventual woke-ification? Certain things could be put in a hard to change constitution, but still …

    By the way, someone pointed something out to me the other day that I had never noticed: The right has co-opted the word “woke,” as they did with “fake news,” originally a lefty coinage, until Trump decided it was useful. There is a definite smell of ridicule to”woke” now.

    • Replies: @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
    It's been said that you can kill a man, but not kill an idea. The principles of liberals and normie conservativism must be discredited and destroyed.

    The extreme egalitarianism of today's West and the idea that people are alike all over, want the same things and are capable of the same things, must be tossed into the ashcan of history. How we do it is another story.

    Redstan would look like the America of our childhood - overwhelmingly White and culturally Christian. Bluestan would be populated by every race, ethnicity, religion, sex and sexual proclivity on the planet and they would tear each other apart in the battle for dominance.

    The liberal Age of the Enlightenment is dying and Age of Demography is being born.

  63. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    To expand on your point, I hope that the churches down there aren’t racing to import as many Somalis and other assorted vibrants into Texas like they do in the rest of the US.

    In the rest of the US, the churches seem to favor the worship of Mammon, possibly Baphomet because they are addicted to the filthy lucre the FedGov pays them to import the Third World.

  64. In stating this I am sending a note to the Dead-Letter Office, but facts do matter. The War Between the States in the middle of the 19th Century was not a civil war. A civil war is two (or more) factions fighting for control of a government. What happened here was a war betweeen two nations. The CSA was a nation just as certainly, and on the same evidence, as the USA.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes
    • Thanks: Hail
  65. @Achmed E. Newman
    About the money, or currency, I should say: I don't see that as any factor important to whether the US breaks up or not. The US dollar will go down the toilet anyway, once enough people, mostly elsewhere in the world, realize that the cleanest dirty shirt is still dirty.

    On a short-term basis, anything valuable will be used as currency, but I'm thinking more of a SHTF scenario, something kind of likely in any non-peaceful breakup. For the long-term, you're gonna have to start with something that IS money, and that means having your currency backed by gold and silver - what a concept!

    Gold, silver or at least toilet paper

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Exactly. Embossed, stamped, and chipped toilet paper, backed by ... you guessed it, Gold or Silver.

    Oh, gotta go to the bathroom? Use those old 5's and 10's - Lincoln and Hamilton have always absorbed the most fecal matter.
  66. @Herp McDerp
    Smaller countries are happier ...

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries' citizens are so happy that they're invading us by the millions.

    ... and less corrupt.

    Assumes facts not in evidence! (And if Chicago became its own country, would that magically make it less corrupt?)

    They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily ...

    They’re also more inclined to be conquered and exploited when larger countries throw their weight around militarily.

    ...and they’re freer.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap'n Crunch takes over.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap’n Crunch takes over.

    One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes. There are a couple of dozen governments worldwide which have a military dimension. There might be a half-dozen military autocrats like Gen. Sisi in Egypt. (He’s formally retired and favors business suits now, btw).

    • Replies: @Wency
    Good observation. I guess the consensus opinion is that it looks tacky. The business suit seems to say "You say our elections are a sham, but I'm wearing a suit just like all the democracies' politicians, so how could I be a dictator?"

    Also, successful coups have dropped quite a bit. I saw a stat that coup success rates hovered in the 40-50% range during the Cold War years but are now closer to 15-20%. Stability tends to lead to the shedding of military uniforms.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    "One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes."

    Bad optics in a globalised media world.
  67. @Bard of Bumperstickers
    Yes.

    Secession RESULTED in America. It is inherently American. Do it again.

    “Once one concedes that a single world government is not necessary, then where does one logically stop at the permissibility of separate states? If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as in a state of impermissible ‘anarchy’, why may not the South secede from the United States? New York State from the Union? New York City from the state? Why may not Manhattan secede? Each neighbourhood? Each block? Each house? Each person?” ~ Murray N. Rothbard

    Sure secede down to the individual, every man an Island unto himself. But then how would you defend against an enemy Nation that looks upon this land of atomized individuals as easy pickings? Well you’d have to unify and raise the money to build a military.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Organising collective security in the absence of a parasitic government has been a solved problem for over 1000 years. It was already solved when Molinari wrote "The Production of Security" in 1849.

    The túath system in Ireland - a system of voluntary association, private law, and no taxation - managed to defend itself from invasion by England for 600 years. The Icelandic Commonwealth[1] - very specifically a voluntary panarchy - lasted for longer than the US has lasted to date.

    And of course there's the Pashtun, who have just beaten the 4th Empire who tried to take their (rather meagre) shit. In their natural state, the jirga system does fuck-all interference in the average citizen's lives - but if someone turns up uninvited the Pashtun sort that shit out.

    Folks who get a damp patch in their knickers over putative martial prowess of standing militaries, fail to understand that despite their "might" they are the underdog in 4G war. Arreguín-Toft's "How the Weak Win Wars" [2] is ~20 pages, and ought to be mandatory reading (before people go further and flesh it out with, say, John Robb and William S Lind).

    Damp-patch dead-enders always fall for some version of the 'stab in the back' theory: "If we had gone all out, we would have won", ignoring that the prize would have been ruined in the process. The French call it jusquauboutism - the Frogs have a shitty grasp of sunk cost, yet even they have a pejorative for dead-enderism.


    [1] People who take an interest in this stuff also refer to it as the Icelandic Free State, which is a better fit with the etymology of the Icelandic þjóðveldið - þjóð: people (also land, nation); veldið: regime (cognate of veldi: power) although auto-translate renders þjóðveldi as 'Commonwealth' nowadays.

    [2] Arreguín-Toft, I (2001) How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict" International Security, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Summer 2001), pp. 93–128
  68. Yes, it should.

    But the lefties will never go for it willingly. They don’t want to be left alone to live their way, they need to suppress us ‘evil’ people and force us to comply with “sustainable, non racist” living.

    But, realistically, this won’t happen in good times. But when the dollar collapses, California, Illinois, NY, and a few other states go to Washington to ask for a bailout, and us Red State’ers say , “Oh Hail No!”, then you get a break up or a civil war.

    I think there is no way liberty survives as long as white lefties, aka California, has influence in our politics.

  69. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    75% of Texans go to church every Sunday

    What percentage of those services are in Spanish, hombre?

  70. Anonymous[179] • Disclaimer says:

    What difference would it make?

    Corporations would continue to boycott Red America while Republicans would continue to cut their taxes and only do anything if they boycotted Israel. Red America, or at least parts of it, would criminalize abortion, assuring a spike in the crime rates about fifteen years later and gradually turning the South Blacker and Blacker. There’d be a lot of “man up you manchildren” tradcon rhetoric but nothing real to promote family values. No reform in divorce law, certainly.

    We shouldn’t treating white Democrats as if they are all irredeemable. If Trump loses in 2016 it won’t be because of Silicon Valley soyboys but because the white workers in Michigan and Pennsylvania don’t like tax cuts for the wealthy and don’t want their daughters to become unwed mothers at 18 because they’re shtupping some loser and abortion’s no longer available. Those are not unreasonable demands. A real nationalist party could win these voters. The current GOP can’t.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Lurker

    criminalize abortion, assuring a spike in the crime rates about fifteen years later and gradually turning the South Blacker and Blacker
     
    Steve pretty much debunked the crime angle some time ago.
  71. @IHTG
    It won't happen. The US is an icon of global stability and the entire world would rise up to stop it. A million compromises would be tried and tested beforehand.

    A more reasonable goal for people of the secessionist persuasion is to fight for further political devolution to the states.

    A more reasonable goal for people of the secessionist persuasion is to fight for further political devolution to the states.

    You’re right; too bad everybody equates States Rights with Slavery, which is the Worst Thing Whites Ever Invented. Why, the Constitution included States Rights only to preserve slavery! There was no other reason.

    Fortunately, when the dollar loses its reserve currency status in a few years, the Feds will be so bankrupt that power will fall to the states by, literally, default.

  72. @Anonymous
    The U.S. has already broken up, but most people haven't noticed yet. States are openly violating federal law (sanctuary cities and the like) and getting away with it. Federal immigration law is a dead letter because Washington can't or won't enforce it.

    The next step will be for individual states to begin negotiating their own trade and diplomatic policies with various foreign states. The principle is the same.

    Yes, this is the step that we need to take, and it’s important to think about it and act intelligently. The most important point in Steve’s piece read the observation that after the breakup, money will continue to flow towards NYC and SF. The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    Regional level protectionism needs to start before Civil War 2, and if it’s done well maybe it could postpone or even cancel it.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.
     
    The heartland needs to rope in bright whites who have expatriated from the heartland to the coasts.

    I'm not sure how you do that.

    There seem to be a large number of people that are willing to put up with the high costs of living and regional overcrowding inherent with living on the US' coasts.
    , @Alden
    First thing the heartland needs to do is reclaim, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Chicago, Memphis St Louis and other cities from the blacks.

    Second thing is get rid of all the primitive illegal alien Hispanics who do all the work on farms ranches , slaughter houses, packing plants, canneries, freezer plants and drive the trucks that deliver the food to wholesale and retail food markets staffed by illegal alien Hispanics

    If anyone can shut down the American food supply, it’s the illegal alien Indians.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    Much is made of California produce, but for Blue America's beloved "avocado toast", you need both avocados and toast. Where is their wheat going to come from?
    Red America still has all the commodity farming (wheat, corn, soy) farmland that drives the US economy.

    One thing that's overlooked is that without Redmerica, the "identity tensions" that are currently driving the Red/Blue split would still exist in Blumerica, but largely disappear in Redmerica. Steve says they would re-appear in future generations, but in the short term, it would get much better in one and much worse in the other. Blumerican society is much more on the precipice of chaos than Redmerican. Imagine all the homeless and the minority ghetto dwellers in the event of social disruption.

    Nevertheless, I agree with Steve that the military would be on the side of union. Unlike the last civil war, when Redmerica essentially had the best of the officer corps, it now essentially has enlisted (retired). With control of the command and communication structures and infrastructure of the military, pro-union forces would maintain control. And I'm sure that the eventuality Steve references has been modeled and planned for inside current DOD.
  73. @Almost Missouri
    I don't think we need to fantasize about What Would Stalin Do. I would happily settle for What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity. And he did this with minimal bloodshed. If the Nobel Peace Prize were serious, Putin would have earned a century's worth. (But it's not, so he won't.)

    Now does the US Deep State have its own Putin figure?

    Survey says ...

    What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity.

    From a purely pragmatic perspective, Putin has been far and away the most intelligent and effective world leader of the past two decades. Whoever is second place is not even close.

    He was dealt an incredibly shitty hand at the beginning of his presidential career and overall he has played it masterfully.

  74. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    The cities are where the money is, and the troops will follow the money. The rural areas prevailing only makes possible sense in a scenario where the US military is first dissolved. American rural folk are not Pashtun tribesmen.

    • Agree: Liza
    • Replies: @Realist

    The cities are where the money is, and the troops will follow the money.
     
    Most troops are from rural areas.
  75. @Art Deco
    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap’n Crunch takes over.

    One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes. There are a couple of dozen governments worldwide which have a military dimension. There might be a half-dozen military autocrats like Gen. Sisi in Egypt. (He's formally retired and favors business suits now, btw).

    Good observation. I guess the consensus opinion is that it looks tacky. The business suit seems to say “You say our elections are a sham, but I’m wearing a suit just like all the democracies’ politicians, so how could I be a dictator?”

    Also, successful coups have dropped quite a bit. I saw a stat that coup success rates hovered in the 40-50% range during the Cold War years but are now closer to 15-20%. Stability tends to lead to the shedding of military uniforms.

  76. @Art Deco
    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap’n Crunch takes over.

    One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes. There are a couple of dozen governments worldwide which have a military dimension. There might be a half-dozen military autocrats like Gen. Sisi in Egypt. (He's formally retired and favors business suits now, btw).

    “One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes.”

    Bad optics in a globalised media world.

    • Replies: @Hail
    What is a military regime?

    It is said the the US military "runs" the State Department, for instance. And then there is the weird Support-Our-Troops cheerleading for the US military that has become de rigueur in US culture in the 2000s and 2010s. Are these not little signposts of a military regime? To say nothing of the endless interventions and wars.

    So along a sliding scale, how far along does the US of 2020 qualify as a military regime? The generals aren't the ones with titular head-of-state roles, fine, but...

    , @Art Deco
    Bad optics in a globalised media world.

    Who says they care about optics?
  77. It will never happen. Everybody who matters is against a break-up. And the US military will never allow it because their livelihood depends on a bloated armed forces.

  78. @Achmed E. Newman
    You are right, Steve, to disagree with this wonky professor's take. No, the US can't be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.

    Secondly, this silliness about D vs. R shows the author's lack of awareness of reality. 1/2 of Americans don't vote anyway, and I can't blame them. This is between the "deplorables" and the elites/their useful idiots/most non-whites and immigrants. (not all, mind you). It's more serious than any election of the kind we have nowadays.

    The author's example of a secession movement being started specifically due to some election results is also ignorant of reality and could only come from someone in the virtual ivory tower. Nobody will do anything serious on this until boxed into a corner financially, culturally, and just from the encroaching tyranny. The spark of this event could be a new law regarding more PC-woke crap coming to the schools, serious gun laws with the word "confiscation" involved, but most likely will happen after this Ponzi-scheme of an economy of ours has peaked out.

    People still have, or think they have, too much to lose to start violent movements* right now. Once they realize that don't have much to lose, things will change. There will be some spark, and then all bets are off. I have no idea how this country can/will divide up, but there's a book I've read on-line about it that's a whole lot more realistic than Frank Buckley's take. No, I'm not getting his book.

    BTW, the War Between the States was not simply about slavery, but I'll let others argue that one. I did appreciate the humorous line about Andrea Dworkin!

    .

    * Yeah, well, that's just it, the antifa are a crowd of losers who DON'T have much to lose.

    No, the US can’t be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.

    As this fine-scaled map of racial residence shows, division occurs at the precinct level around cities, but most of rural America is still purely Caucasians descended from early immigrants. And such folks are the most capable segment of the national population when it comes to providing themselves with the necessities.

    https://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/

  79. Conservatives may like the tough talk, but we are really good at surrendering without a shot. The only reason secession is even being discussed is because of this country’s insane immigration policies over the last 50 years, but especially the last 30 of those. Colorado has voted Republican in recent memory. Hell, there are even still people alive who remember when California was voting for Republicans.

    Kick all of the recent immigrants out and then see if this country is nearly as divided as it is now. Without their imported mercenaries, the far left wouldn’t be much of a threat.

    Why the hell should we let the Mexicans have California back?

  80. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable’s in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable’s in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.
     
    They also seem to have this delusion that the police and military, with their deplorable-funded salaries, will always do liberal bidding and squash any uppity deplorables.

    They don't seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don't seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.
  81. @Anonymous
    Chomsky made an interesting point about the Quebec vote I didn't think of.

    He said it was a good thing for Quebec patriots they lost because in actual fact independence wasn't on the table because an anti-canadian Quebec would simply become an American colony by the laws of gravity. That was the choice: Canada or being wholly dependent on American interests to *let* you resist Canadian rule.

    If you talk to people in Quebec today, they are very happy with the current situation, with their language requirements they have kept out the hordes that are busting at the seams in places like Toronto and Vancouver, they have a very good trained workforce in high demand areas like SW programming, this allows their kids to stay close while still earn a good living.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666

    with their language requirements they have kept out the hordes that are busting at the seams in places like Toronto and Vancouver
     
    Interesting point. Quebec has been able to use its off-brand language and culture as a barrier to globalism.

    For better or worse, English is the world's second language. This is no doubt one of the reasons the U.S./U.K./Canada are such especially attractive targets for immigration.

  82. I kind of like the idea of bifurcating the currency.

    One dollar would be gold-backed, for people who think government spending should be decreased.

    The other would be virtue-signaling/government employee bucks, designed with a slate of diverse portraits, like Sojourner Truth and Harvey Milk and interest rates determined by the Black Congressional Caucus.

    • Replies: @Neoconned
    I've wondered if we could separate taxes into different "pots." Each would come from each racial group's "pay in".....

    So wannabe Kardashian white coalburner sluts....instead of having you & me pick up the welfare tab for them would have to collect from the black tax pool etc...make her face social stigma etc. Most black women would prefer this as it would put pressure on their men to provide for them etc

    Thats the new white girl thing....act black and have kids with thugs and have white nerd tax drones finance it while they do social media social attention campaigns....
  83. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    Bay Area chokepoint is the 100 mile plus pipeline that carries water from near Yosemite to the reservoirs in Santa Clara county, it goes through some pretty red terrain in Sierra foothills which voted for Trump by 30+ points, in a hypothetical skirmish between blue and red America, this pipeline gets shut and blue America will only have Oakland’s Black Panthers and Nortenos gang to fight the deplorables of the gold country to get this pipeline opened.

  84. Its called population transfer. Voluntary or involuntary. Moving people to fit borders, instead of moving borders to fit people.

    That being said, for the record, it will be california that succeeds from the U.S.

    Why?

    Because an economy that large, with its own culture, its own govt structure, amount of natural resources, et that doesn’t control its own currency is an anomaly. Its an anomaly because it would be so much in California’s own interest to have that control.

    It will happen in the next 20 years, once the dollar is no longer the global reserve currency.

  85. @RichardTaylor
    A dream that would be make so many, so happy!

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.

    Imagine being free of the despicable Whites who hate other Whites.

    https://www.amazon.com/Escape-Rome-Prosperity-Princeton-Economic/dp/0691172188/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=escape+from+rome&qid=1583318773&sr=8-1

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.

    Yes, in the long run Europe prospered even more once it was free of Roman occupation. The only problem was that the “long run” required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization. When it came to things like plumbing and roads, Roman levels were not achieved again until the late 19th century. If getting rid of the “despicable Whites” (each side thinks that the other side’s whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I’m not sure the game is worth the candle.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The only problem was that the “long run” required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization.
     
    It turns out that isn’t true. That’s what we were taught but historians have always known better. There were definitely a few generations in certain parts where things got bad. But the 1,000 years of darkness is myth. In fact the whole term “dark ages“ was invented in the renaissance to disparage the middle ages.

    A medieval army of 1100 A.D. would’ve destroyed a Roman army of similar size.
    , @RichardTaylor

    If getting rid of the “despicable Whites” (each side thinks that the other side’s whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I’m not sure the game is worth the candle.
     
    I think that's a false equivalence. Most Whites are happy to leave silly ass yuppies, hipsters and SJWs alone. But the other side is actively engaged in attacking us with ruinous policies.

    And yeah, I think Carl Sagan was wrong when he implied the "fall of Rome" set us back a thousand years and we'd be living among the stars now etc, etc. Remember, the eastern half never fell, it became the Byzantine empire. Why didn't they invent warp drives by the year 1400AD?
  86. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.

    I hope this post receives a lot more ‘Reactions,’ making it into an iSteve-commentariat poll equivalent; useful data if sample size bigger. And minimal risk of ballot-stuffing because it is a public vote attached to long-term commenter-IDs.

    So far running 6:2 in favor of a breakup of the United States (five Agrees plus TGTOD’s original ‘Yes’).

  87. @Almost Missouri
    I don't think we need to fantasize about What Would Stalin Do. I would happily settle for What Would Putin Do. In a few years he took a fractured, impoverished, supine and exploited country and put it back on the road to superpower status with relative domestic tranquility and prosperity. And he did this with minimal bloodshed. If the Nobel Peace Prize were serious, Putin would have earned a century's worth. (But it's not, so he won't.)

    Now does the US Deep State have its own Putin figure?

    Survey says ...

    put it back on the road to superpower status

    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version? Putin’s militaristic facade conceals a lot of rot. Putin was very lucky for a while in that high oil prices held up his regime, but without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus. And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?

    You have to say that Putin has somewhat stabilized the ship but what course has he charted it on? What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Real gross domestic product (with fuel and mineral exports deducted) doubled over the period running from 1999 to 2018. Russia is also the one occidental country which has seen considerable improvements in fertility over the last twenty years (raising it from 1.16 children per woman per lifetime to 1.75). Per capita product according to purchasing power parity (excluding what's attributable to fuel and mineral exports) increased from 0.14x that of the United States in 1999 to 0.37x that of the United States in 2016. Russia's economic performance outside the extractive industries has been more than satisfactory.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus."
     
    Well, that's a little unfair. Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population. Putin has no doubt skimmed something for himself, but far less than he has given back in order, defense, and knocking off competing corruption. There is something to be said for a single central authority who may be above the rules but who cares about his country (we used to call this "monarchy" and many achieved greatness) versus random rapacious moral-foreigners taking everything they can get away with, which is what Russia formerly faced and what Americans are increasingly facing.

    "And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?"
     
    Good question. Presumably, that's why they're working on a new constitution as we speak.

    "What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?"
     
    I've been hearing about this supposed post-fossil fuel world for a long time, yet it somehow keeps being just over the horizon. Sorta like fusion power. Electricity doesn't generate itself, you gotta burn something: wood, fossil, uranium, or part of the Earth's surface has to be permanently deprived of sunlight. Yeah, you can do a bit of wind or wave around the edges, but are you gonna power the global freight fleet with that?

    Meanwhile, global energy demand just keeps rising.

    Even if energy somehow becomes free—someone invents the magic Tesla reactor—Russia's domestic economy is still in decent shape, and the arms market will always demand an alternative to high-cost, high-maintenance, lots-of-strings-attached US offers. And Russia gets to operate without the ever-growing albatross of Diversity around its neck. Nowadays the US has to sprint full speed just to stay in place with its Diversity burden. Russia's chief future rival is even-less-Diverse China, not the US.

    Bonus: if global warming ever really happens, it's all upside for Russia.
    , @Oscar Peterson

    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version?
     
    "Superpower" is a largely meaningless, much over-used word. And the question of whether Russia is or will be one again is likewise. Putin is trying to rebuild as much of the Russian state's power as he reasonably can. I don't think he has any illusions that Russia is a full peer of the US. He's even said that publicly. He sees Russia as one of a handful of swing states (with India and perhaps Japan in the future) between "the West," i.e., the US and its dependents and China. And he wants to bring as many former Soviet states as makes sense into the Russian orbit or at least into a state of leaning towards Moscow.

    He has been somewhat successful in rebuilding the imploded national culture of the Russia, and he is clearly inclined to take as many pages out of the Chinese economic playbook as can be made to work in a Russian environment.

    In the end, the issue is not merely whether Russia's future is rosy, but how it will stack up to other power centers. The US and Europe both have major problems and are in decline--the only question is how steep a decline. India will always be a bit of a chaotic mess. So a meaningful estimate of the "correlation of forces" means looking at both sides of the equation, not just Russia and its trajectory.

    Wherever Russia goes from here, I think it is correct to say that it has bottomed out. The same cannot be said of the US and the EU.
  88. I think this would make a crackerjack video game. (Seriously).

  89. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    “One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.”

    “5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can’t do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.”

    Exactly right. That’s why the biggest joke here is how VA militia should just surrender because the gun controllers have a NG in which they could just bomb and bomb and they would be defeated.

    Israel contracted decades ago with the engineering firm Sargent & Lundy to design power transmission towers that would remain standing if one of the legs were blown off. The US military attacked Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War power transmission towers with cruise missiles equipped with carbon fiber strands that when dropped on transmission towers would create a short circuit through plasma when they vaporized. Just think what modern consumer drones could do carrying spools of wire to the cosmopolitans waiting for their easy victory over red America in their Democrat controlled urban areas. At ground level, even a commercially available antenna launcher could be pressed service to knock out power transmission.

    The economic costs of blue America war on red America would be like in THX 1138 where it just wouldn’t be worth it to the the State.

    [1:50]

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    The ease with which key networks can be disrupted, is one of the pieces of evidence[1] that supports my "Global terrrrrist networks are bullshit" hypothesis.

    If something akin to the mythical al-Qa'eda existed, major American cities would go through random periods where they went without electricity, water, and communications for weeks on end; major parts of transportation networks would blow up randomly (including the major underground pipeliness that take fuel to airports[1]); there would be phylloxera in all wine-growing areas and PCBs (or dimethyl mercury) in the water ... and so on and so forth.

    Given how geographically distributed the keys nodes are, Federal and State governments would be bankrupted just from the costs of 'hardening' critical infrastructure against a few hundred genuinely-committed, adequately-resourced and willing-to-die insurgents.

    A globe-spanning organisation wasting resources by trying to blow up enemy civilians a few dozen at a time, is so fucking stupid (tactically, strategically, and in terms of relevance to goals and OODA loops) that it is only ever done by governments.

    .

    [1] The primary dot-point is - obviously - that none of the neocon 'thought leaders' has been assassinated.

    [2] Everybody knows where these pipelines are.
  90. anon[200] • Disclaimer says:

    Farmers are the biggest pro immigration bunch around. Urbans don’t really care about higher minimum wages, since there is a lot more pricing power in cities. Remember back in the big union 50’s when the big 3 auto companies and teamsters just crammed down their big union pay down the deplorables throat? That’s what got us started down this path.

    But farming has its virtues, but is an awful business. It produces commodities. The single price levels that are virtually unchanged from the 50’s are grains. They are less than $5 bushel.

    The rural heartland is truly addicted to cheap immigrant labor.

    Maybe California could get their own version of Brexit, but then what?

    • Replies: @TWS
    Pickers are illegals but red States will institute a bracero system s and send them home when they're done. Damn few want them as neighbors given a choice
  91. Every country bigger than a tour bus should break up.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The archaeological evidence is that most Stone Age human bands ( as opposed to rock bands) had no more than 50 people.
    , @Charon
    Agreed, roughly speaking, and I'll also put this here since Ron's posting limits prevent me from quoting it in context:

    Minnesota, which is basically a Soviet miners’ mural with a Somali face painted over Trotsky’s
     
    That's pretty good.
  92. @SFG
    It's not just Kimberle Crenshaw and Ta-Nehisi Coates. There is the whole corpus of third-tier assistant professors and K-12 teachers in blue and purple areas spreading this stuff.

    Right but these people are not original thinkers – they are just followers. If the Party Line was something different, they would fall into place. Better yet, just get rid of their jobs – who needs a Dept. of Sociology anyway? Let these folks get honest paying work as baristas at Starbucks. If we really need Sociology, we can start over fresh with people who are not sworn enemies of America.

    And the Chinese understand that you only need to kill 1 chicken to scare all the monkeys. These folks are spouting nonsense now because, not only are they not punished for it, they are rewarded. If you changed the incentive structure and provided a few examples of what happens to people who promote hatred of Western civilization, they would shut up right quick.

    The Whites in Russia thought that they could set up a few enclaves that could withstand Communist domination. This was not tenable and neither is splitting up America. The South tried that once and it didn’t work then either. Or look at Taiwan (while it still exists). The Communists got the entire mainland and the right was left with a little island. Who is the world power now? The only winning strategy is to go for the whole enchilada. “Half a loaf is better than none” is false because the other side is not going to let you keep your half of the loaf.

    Now how do you go for the prize in a democracy when you have been demographically outnumbered by imported ringers? The answer (see Communist China, Communist anywhere) is that you get rid of democracy, not that you split up the country.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "The Whites in Russia thought that they could set up a few enclaves that could withstand Communist domination. This was not tenable and neither is splitting up America. The South tried that once and it didn’t work then either. Or look at Taiwan (while it still exists). The Communists got the entire mainland and the right was left with a little island. Who is the world power now? The only winning strategy is to go for the whole enchilada. “Half a loaf is better than none” is false because the other side is not going to let you keep your half of the loaf.

    Now how do you go for the prize in a democracy when you have been demographically outnumbered by imported ringers? The answer (see Communist China, Communist anywhere) is that you get rid of democracy, not that you split up the country."
     

    This is an interesting point, and one of the few apparently substantial arguments against separation. But, as your examples show, no solution is final. The Red pullback from the coasts is a consolidation to make a capable state free from the missteps of the 20th century. The DC/NY/LA-free US would still be a superpower, and should DC/NY/LA choose to defy it, they will likely have the experience that Georgia did when it recklessly defied Russia a decade back. Killing that one chicken did indeed scare all the monkeys.

    And the Red America need not formally reconquer the coastal trading enclaves. China benefited and still benefits from having Hong Kong as a separate-system trading entrepot to the outside, as the Arab peninsula benefits from Dubai, and the UK benefits from its various extra-territorial havens. The entrepot merchants know the score: business stays good while they don't upset their big neighbor/sponsor. DC/NY/LA can have infinity immigration, endless welfare, central bank theft, race-spoils rules superseding the Constitution, anal pride parades, and high taxes if it suits them. They just can't force it on the rest of America. What's wrong with that?

    I suspect that once DC/NY/LA are self-contained and the costs of their vices can no longer be passed off to a compliant interior, they will suddenly lose their enthusiasm for most of them. Otherwise, with a refreshed white supermajority in Red America and infinite immigration in DC/NY/LA, it is the latter who will have to face tough questions about whether they can remain democratic.

  93. Hail says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman
    You are right, Steve, to disagree with this wonky professor's take. No, the US can't be divided based on State borders or even on county borders. You can zoom in on the red/blue divide and see it goes down to precinct level.

    Secondly, this silliness about D vs. R shows the author's lack of awareness of reality. 1/2 of Americans don't vote anyway, and I can't blame them. This is between the "deplorables" and the elites/their useful idiots/most non-whites and immigrants. (not all, mind you). It's more serious than any election of the kind we have nowadays.

    The author's example of a secession movement being started specifically due to some election results is also ignorant of reality and could only come from someone in the virtual ivory tower. Nobody will do anything serious on this until boxed into a corner financially, culturally, and just from the encroaching tyranny. The spark of this event could be a new law regarding more PC-woke crap coming to the schools, serious gun laws with the word "confiscation" involved, but most likely will happen after this Ponzi-scheme of an economy of ours has peaked out.

    People still have, or think they have, too much to lose to start violent movements* right now. Once they realize that don't have much to lose, things will change. There will be some spark, and then all bets are off. I have no idea how this country can/will divide up, but there's a book I've read on-line about it that's a whole lot more realistic than Frank Buckley's take. No, I'm not getting his book.

    BTW, the War Between the States was not simply about slavery, but I'll let others argue that one. I did appreciate the humorous line about Andrea Dworkin!

    .

    * Yeah, well, that's just it, the antifa are a crowd of losers who DON'T have much to lose.

    It is telling that one of the top-viewed political videos of 2019 from a minor/new youtuber male (not a million-follower, well-established person and not an “e-girl” politics-talker) was this one:

    CIVIL WAR 2 in America – WHO WOULD WIN? In-Depth Analysis
    1,706,656 views • Jun 8, 2019

    The youtuber, then new, is John Mark. He was motivated to start youtubing by the work of dissident-libertarian-nationalist Curt Doolittle and his Propertarianism ideology, which predicts a breakup of the US and argues for a serious overhaul of the Constitution and judicial system to end the “media-run state,” argues that ethnocultural continuity is a form of commons that is to be protected. (John Mark and Curt Doolittle, of New England, met for the first time at the Richmond rally.)

    Curt Doolittle is worth attention re: a US breakup and what comes after.

  94. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:

    Steve Sailer:

    “So which side would the U.S. military tend to support in a battle of secessionism vs. nationalism? My impression is that the U.S. military very much enjoys representing the strongest, most ass-kicking country on earth and intends to keep the USA that way.”

    And yet, the “most butt-kicking country on Earth” couldn’t pacify a few thousand savages in Afghanistan even after being there for 20 years. Not to mention they couldn’t beat a bunch of peasants with AK-47s in Vietnam.

    “So, if the politicians can’t agree on an amicable Czech-Slovak-style split-up, and the obvious controversies over who gets, say, the port of San Diego suggest that they won’t, then the effective decision would wind up in the hands of the hard men of the military.”

    In true “democratic” fashion. Just like in all those Latin American countries you look down upon, with their tendency of the military to intervene during crisis. So America is solidly going the Banana Republic tradition…

    “And my guess is, military men like things just the way they are and have no intention of weakening America on the world stage by allowing petty politicians to split up the most awe-inspiring military in human history.”

    Anyone who knows anything about military affairs would say that the most awe-inspiring militaries in history would be either the Roman Legions from the time of Caesar to Trajan, or the German Wehrmacht in WWII. In terms of quality of material, organization and efficiency man-for-man, the most awe-inspiring militaries ever would be one of those two. The U.S just throws more money into it’s military than anybody else, but money does not = quality.

    • Agree: ben tillman, Anon87
    • Replies: @Federalist

    And yet, the “most butt-kicking country on Earth” couldn’t pacify a few thousand savages in Afghanistan even after being there for 20 years. Not to mention they couldn’t beat a bunch of peasants with AK-47s in Vietnam.
     
    Yeah, the effectiveness of the U.S. military against a truly hostile American population is vastly overstated. The U.S. military couldn't subdue much smaller and less advanced populations. And unlike in Vietnam and Afghanistan, the military would be based in hostile territory. But for any of that to happen, the population would have to be willing to turn the U.S. into Vietnam or Afghanistan. I can't see people actually giving up lives of comfort and ease to fight the established govt.
  95. Hail says: • Website
    @YetAnotherAnon
    "One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes."

    Bad optics in a globalised media world.

    What is a military regime?

    It is said the the US military “runs” the State Department, for instance. And then there is the weird Support-Our-Troops cheerleading for the US military that has become de rigueur in US culture in the 2000s and 2010s. Are these not little signposts of a military regime? To say nothing of the endless interventions and wars.

    So along a sliding scale, how far along does the US of 2020 qualify as a military regime? The generals aren’t the ones with titular head-of-state roles, fine, but…

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    It is said the the US military “runs” the State Department, for instance.

    By the same people fascinated with Nostradamus.


    And then there is the weird Support-Our-Troops cheerleading for the US military that has become de rigueur in US culture in the 2000s and 2010s.

    There's nothing peculiar about it, to people who appreciate something other than themselves and people just like them.


    Are these not little signposts of a military regime?

    Only between your two ears.


    To say nothing of the endless interventions and wars.

    The term 'endless' does not mean what you fancy it means.


    So along a sliding scale, how far along does the US of 2020 qualify as a military regime? The generals aren’t the ones with titular head-of-state roles, fine, but…

    Zero, to people who aren't working to talk themselves into this conclusion.
  96. There is no reason why the US should not break into a number of parts.

    Certainly Florida, the state that I live in, as an independent nation would be by far the most affluent, populous, productive, and largest country in the Caribbean and Gulf region, barring Mexico and even tiny countries like Bermuda (technically not an independent nation, but effectively self governing) and St. Kitts and Nevis have their own currency, customs, and immigration rules, and get by perfectly well.

    The advantage of being independent is that we would not be forced to share laws with other states in different climate zones and with different types of population and we would not be under the thumb of the rulings of the wackon Supreme Court of the US.

  97. @Anonymous
    Chomsky made an interesting point about the Quebec vote I didn't think of.

    He said it was a good thing for Quebec patriots they lost because in actual fact independence wasn't on the table because an anti-canadian Quebec would simply become an American colony by the laws of gravity. That was the choice: Canada or being wholly dependent on American interests to *let* you resist Canadian rule.

    I thought Canada WAS an American colony.

  98. @Jack D

    put it back on the road to superpower status
     
    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version? Putin's militaristic facade conceals a lot of rot. Putin was very lucky for a while in that high oil prices held up his regime, but without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus. And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?

    You have to say that Putin has somewhat stabilized the ship but what course has he charted it on? What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?

    Real gross domestic product (with fuel and mineral exports deducted) doubled over the period running from 1999 to 2018. Russia is also the one occidental country which has seen considerable improvements in fertility over the last twenty years (raising it from 1.16 children per woman per lifetime to 1.75). Per capita product according to purchasing power parity (excluding what’s attributable to fuel and mineral exports) increased from 0.14x that of the United States in 1999 to 0.37x that of the United States in 2016. Russia’s economic performance outside the extractive industries has been more than satisfactory.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    As I said, Putin stabilized things but starting from a very low base. The fertility you give is still below replacement, albeit not as low as before. Having an income that is 37% of the US average (while better than having one that is 14% of the US average) is nothing to write home about. Let's take away 2/3rds of you income and let me know if that is "satisfactory" to you. Russia is a vast nation brimming with potential wealth - enormous natural resources (not just oil), not very crowded, a white population and yet the average Russian lives in Mexican level poverty because the place has always been misruled.
  99. @Hail
    What is a military regime?

    It is said the the US military "runs" the State Department, for instance. And then there is the weird Support-Our-Troops cheerleading for the US military that has become de rigueur in US culture in the 2000s and 2010s. Are these not little signposts of a military regime? To say nothing of the endless interventions and wars.

    So along a sliding scale, how far along does the US of 2020 qualify as a military regime? The generals aren't the ones with titular head-of-state roles, fine, but...

    It is said the the US military “runs” the State Department, for instance.

    By the same people fascinated with Nostradamus.

    And then there is the weird Support-Our-Troops cheerleading for the US military that has become de rigueur in US culture in the 2000s and 2010s.

    There’s nothing peculiar about it, to people who appreciate something other than themselves and people just like them.

    Are these not little signposts of a military regime?

    Only between your two ears.

    To say nothing of the endless interventions and wars.

    The term ‘endless’ does not mean what you fancy it means.

    So along a sliding scale, how far along does the US of 2020 qualify as a military regime? The generals aren’t the ones with titular head-of-state roles, fine, but…

    Zero, to people who aren’t working to talk themselves into this conclusion.

  100. @YetAnotherAnon
    "One of the curios of our time has been the incremental disappearance of military regimes."

    Bad optics in a globalised media world.

    Bad optics in a globalised media world.

    Who says they care about optics?

  101. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    That’s what they said in 1861, and they were right. Yankees had other ideas, still do.

    • Replies: @Ash Williams

    Yankees had other ideas, still do.
     
    Elite Yankees, and they can't count on LumpenYankees to show up this time.

    Quite to the contrary, I might add...
  102. Civil War is coming. But over slavery. White male slavery.

    Pres. Stacy Abrams will surely, after removing Pres. Biden, demand the enslavement of White men. Having her as President guarantees civil war as much as Lincoln did in 1860.

    The current civil rights system pretty much depends on White male slavery, particularly in the military. The dream is an AI punishment collar on every White mans neck.

    As such this one won’t be the CSA. But more like Rwanda.

  103. @Art Deco
    Real gross domestic product (with fuel and mineral exports deducted) doubled over the period running from 1999 to 2018. Russia is also the one occidental country which has seen considerable improvements in fertility over the last twenty years (raising it from 1.16 children per woman per lifetime to 1.75). Per capita product according to purchasing power parity (excluding what's attributable to fuel and mineral exports) increased from 0.14x that of the United States in 1999 to 0.37x that of the United States in 2016. Russia's economic performance outside the extractive industries has been more than satisfactory.

    As I said, Putin stabilized things but starting from a very low base. The fertility you give is still below replacement, albeit not as low as before. Having an income that is 37% of the US average (while better than having one that is 14% of the US average) is nothing to write home about. Let’s take away 2/3rds of you income and let me know if that is “satisfactory” to you. Russia is a vast nation brimming with potential wealth – enormous natural resources (not just oil), not very crowded, a white population and yet the average Russian lives in Mexican level poverty because the place has always been misruled.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Having an income that is 37% of the US average (while better than having one that is 14% of the US average) is nothing to write home about


    It was actually 44% 'ere you bracket out the fuel and mineral exports. Maddison's compilation of data allows you to compare Tsarist Russia (1886-1916), Soviet Russia (1917-91) , and post-Communist Russia (1992-) with Britain and the United States (making use of Britain as the gold standard prior to 1914 and the United States after). For the period running from 1886 to 1913, the only period in which that ratio was higher ran from 1905 to 1907. For the period running from 1914 to the present, the ratio was higher from 1961 to 1993, with the peak around 1980 + / - 5 years.

    What you write home about depends on what home's like. Most of the world has lower real income levels than does Russia today. So did the United States as recently as 1967.
  104. @Gabe Ruth
    Yes, this is the step that we need to take, and it's important to think about it and act intelligently. The most important point in Steve's piece read the observation that after the breakup, money will continue to flow towards NYC and SF. The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    Regional level protectionism needs to start before Civil War 2, and if it's done well maybe it could postpone or even cancel it.

    The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    The heartland needs to rope in bright whites who have expatriated from the heartland to the coasts.

    I’m not sure how you do that.

    There seem to be a large number of people that are willing to put up with the high costs of living and regional overcrowding inherent with living on the US’ coasts.

    • Replies: @Gabe Ruth
    That would be nice, but I'd settle for staunching the flow.

    The feed of media inanities from our host gets a little dull and counterproductive IMO, but I think he's doing good work to open the eyes of heartland expats and deluded natives.

    We don't need to live like this, and as a wise man said the people trying to tell you otherwise and make the whole country just as garbage have names and addresses.
  105. @Hemid
    Every country bigger than a tour bus should break up.

    The archaeological evidence is that most Stone Age human bands ( as opposed to rock bands) had no more than 50 people.

  106. @anon
    Farmers are the biggest pro immigration bunch around. Urbans don't really care about higher minimum wages, since there is a lot more pricing power in cities. Remember back in the big union 50's when the big 3 auto companies and teamsters just crammed down their big union pay down the deplorables throat? That's what got us started down this path.

    But farming has its virtues, but is an awful business. It produces commodities. The single price levels that are virtually unchanged from the 50's are grains. They are less than $5 bushel.

    The rural heartland is truly addicted to cheap immigrant labor.

    Maybe California could get their own version of Brexit, but then what?

    Pickers are illegals but red States will institute a bracero system s and send them home when they’re done. Damn few want them as neighbors given a choice

  107. @indocon
    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable's in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.

    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable’s in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.

    They also seem to have this delusion that the police and military, with their deplorable-funded salaries, will always do liberal bidding and squash any uppity deplorables.

    They don’t seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don’t seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes

    They don’t seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don’t seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.
     
    Translation: House niggers gon' raaaahz up, put Massah in dey place.

    Cool story, bro.

    Never gonna happen - if government ever tells their goons to turn on the populace, they will do so.

    They pretty much always have - from the Whiskey Rebellion & Shay's Rebellion, to the Bonus Army, to Kent State.

    And that's before considering situations in which the House Niggers could tell themselves that the impending dead weren't real Murkins - Sherman's March to the Sea and devastation of Atlanta and Savannah; the use of air-launched incendiaries during the MOVE standoff in Philly in 1985; Waco; Ruby Ridge.

    Back-shooting Baby-killer coward Lon Horiuchi is a much better example of what to expect.

    If SGHTF* anyone in BDUs should be considered hostile; anyone whose current job involves wearing gaylord SWAT kit should be targeted in their homes (people know where they live); MRAPS should be IEDed or RPGd.

    The House Niggers aren't on our side now: as it stands they are happy caging people for shit that they know is bullshit, and killing people they don't know for reasons they know are bullshit. That's not someone you want on your side, believe me: they will be the first-rank of looters.

    * Shit Genuinely Hits The Fan.

  108. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture

    Texas culture is what?

    At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern “America”

    I love the sentiment and I’m on your side, but none of this ever materializes.

  109. Hail says: • Website
    @Philip
    Better idea. Breakup States

    Breaking up a few states and disassociating parts of them from the United States, as territories without voting rights. Free city-states.

    Chicago out of Illinois
    Las Vegas of out Nevada
    New York City
    Obviously parts of California
    The Virginia problem (which may yet be the spark that begins the process of breaking up the US; it will all look obvious and natural in retrospect.)

    There are a lot of obvious choices. If all borders were dissolved today and redrawn organically, none of these places would be attached to the states around them. Many of these borders are centuries old relics, anachronisms.

  110. Just another clueless academic writing an unneeded book. Actually Robert Kaplan wrote a something called Empire Wilderness on this same general topic about 20 years ago.

    But the idea of a “break-up” bears no relation to reality. Firstly, central states don’t like ceding any national territory almost ever. The American Civil War in one example but far from the only one. Buckley uses one of the few peaceful counterexamples: the Czechs and Slovaks. Norway and Sweden are another. And the USSR, in a state of social and economic collapse is a variation. But look at what has happened in Spain/Catalonia, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, Russia/Chechnya, India/Kashmir, Pakistan/Balochistan, China/Tibet/Xinjiang, Myanmar, etc, etc, etc. I also don’t think the UK will willingly give the Scots another shot at an independence referendum.

    And don’t forget Old Hickory’s plan to march on the Hartford Convention.

    I find it unlikely that the American central state would acquiesce even to Puerto Rican independence much less to the break-up of the country proper.

    And the theorizing about Calexit is a fantasy. A few years ago, there was the same loose talk about Vermont seceding. And there is recurrent chatter about Texas as well.

    It’s true that the diversity-addled, Jewified mess that constitutes our national culture these days is pathetic. And it’s probably true on balance that smaller countries can retain less debased cultures and populations. But that reality does not in itself generate the impetus for an actual break-up. Just a few years ago, there were some neocon shills advocating for a union of the US and Canada.

    Also, interesting that the author does not seem to have factored in the power of other states and the implications for a post-US world. The reason that the Europeans have wanted to create an EU is that they understand that in a world dominated by behemoths, small, rich European countries are sheep waiting to be shorn by the first and second rank powers. The fact that their effort seems to be on the slow road to nowhere doesn’t change the validity of that assessment.

    No, our future is not break-up. It’s as a high-end Mexico, Brazil or India, bereft of the cultural cohesion that we once enjoyed, and more overtly corrupt than in the past, working to build a coalition of states threatened by the continuing rise of China and becoming increasingly Orwellian in an attempt to compete with it.

    • Agree: West Reanimator
  111. @PiltdownMan
    Thinking out of the box for a moment ... WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    Well, Stalin would hardly be content with purging 100 intellectuals, would he?

  112. @Jack D

    put it back on the road to superpower status
     
    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version? Putin's militaristic facade conceals a lot of rot. Putin was very lucky for a while in that high oil prices held up his regime, but without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus. And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?

    You have to say that Putin has somewhat stabilized the ship but what course has he charted it on? What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?

    “without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus.”

    Well, that’s a little unfair. Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population. Putin has no doubt skimmed something for himself, but far less than he has given back in order, defense, and knocking off competing corruption. There is something to be said for a single central authority who may be above the rules but who cares about his country (we used to call this “monarchy” and many achieved greatness) versus random rapacious moral-foreigners taking everything they can get away with, which is what Russia formerly faced and what Americans are increasingly facing.

    “And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?”

    Good question. Presumably, that’s why they’re working on a new constitution as we speak.

    “What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?”

    I’ve been hearing about this supposed post-fossil fuel world for a long time, yet it somehow keeps being just over the horizon. Sorta like fusion power. Electricity doesn’t generate itself, you gotta burn something: wood, fossil, uranium, or part of the Earth’s surface has to be permanently deprived of sunlight. Yeah, you can do a bit of wind or wave around the edges, but are you gonna power the global freight fleet with that?

    Meanwhile, global energy demand just keeps rising.

    Even if energy somehow becomes free—someone invents the magic Tesla reactor—Russia’s domestic economy is still in decent shape, and the arms market will always demand an alternative to high-cost, high-maintenance, lots-of-strings-attached US offers. And Russia gets to operate without the ever-growing albatross of Diversity around its neck. Nowadays the US has to sprint full speed just to stay in place with its Diversity burden. Russia’s chief future rival is even-less-Diverse China, not the US.

    Bonus: if global warming ever really happens, it’s all upside for Russia.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    This is really moving my chairs. The Russian economy is alright, after a long war and Clintonite efforts to derail it: this suggests that not only will it not get worse but, recovering from the war and removing Obama's completely unnecessary and pointless cold war of choice, it could get significantly better. Putting the old Arab stereotype of a one-industry nation of layabouts on Russia -- the people we rely on to get into space -- is dishonest but also enlightening (how diverse can goyim possibly be?). Belarus has a respectable industrial and technological capacity. In fact even the Saudis have done a lot to diversify and develop alternative talents since the 70s. The more Jack talks the more we learn about Jack.
    , @Art Deco
    Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population.

    No clue how valid this index is

    https://www.transparency.org/cpi2019

    just to note they rank White Russia as 66th out of 180 in terms of their homebrew corruption index (with the low numbers posited as the least corrupt). Russia ranks 137th. The World Bank data indicates that domestic product per capita in real terms has quadrupled since 1995. (The country suffered a severe depression from 1991-95). It's a middle-income country now. Walter Lacquer called the place 'a Soviet Vendee'.
  113. I think the largest state, by population, should be the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinois should break up into smaller states of five or six million each. Should Caliph-ornia stay, she could be eight or so. But the Golden Republic’s efforts at total secession shouldn’t be met with much resistance.

    (Did I just use should in the consecutive sentences? Sorry– one should avoid that. Should I do t again, you should call me out on it.)

    Hawai’i is the perfect setup for a diverse state, with separate islands to work with:

    Native control? Ni’ihau.

    Native conrol, with a city or two for convenience? The Big Island.

    [MORE]

    Tourist paradise? Kaua’i.

    Rich man’s playground? Mau’i.

    International mish-mash with modern jobs? Outer O’ahu.

    Military base? Inner O’ahu.

    Firing range? Kaho’olawe.

    Factory farm? Lana’i.

    Leper colony? Already there, now with its own county, perhaps the only one in the U.S. that requires a permit to enter. (Sorry, Texans, Kalawao has surpassed, or “subpassed”, Loving as America’s smallest:

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalawao_County,_Hawaii#Geography
    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalawao_County,_Hawaii#Demographics )

    Any ideas for the rest of Moloka’i?

  114. Breaking up the US only makes sense if two conditions are met:

    1. One of the resulting states be demographically at least 95% white
    2. This new white state finds a foolproof way to limit Jewish power.

    • Agree: Hail
  115. @Jack D

    put it back on the road to superpower status
     
    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version? Putin's militaristic facade conceals a lot of rot. Putin was very lucky for a while in that high oil prices held up his regime, but without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus. And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?

    You have to say that Putin has somewhat stabilized the ship but what course has he charted it on? What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?

    Is modern Russia a real superpower contender or just a Potemkin version?

    “Superpower” is a largely meaningless, much over-used word. And the question of whether Russia is or will be one again is likewise. Putin is trying to rebuild as much of the Russian state’s power as he reasonably can. I don’t think he has any illusions that Russia is a full peer of the US. He’s even said that publicly. He sees Russia as one of a handful of swing states (with India and perhaps Japan in the future) between “the West,” i.e., the US and its dependents and China. And he wants to bring as many former Soviet states as makes sense into the Russian orbit or at least into a state of leaning towards Moscow.

    He has been somewhat successful in rebuilding the imploded national culture of the Russia, and he is clearly inclined to take as many pages out of the Chinese economic playbook as can be made to work in a Russian environment.

    In the end, the issue is not merely whether Russia’s future is rosy, but how it will stack up to other power centers. The US and Europe both have major problems and are in decline–the only question is how steep a decline. India will always be a bit of a chaotic mess. So a meaningful estimate of the “correlation of forces” means looking at both sides of the equation, not just Russia and its trajectory.

    Wherever Russia goes from here, I think it is correct to say that it has bottomed out. The same cannot be said of the US and the EU.

  116. @The Wild Geese Howard

    The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.
     
    The heartland needs to rope in bright whites who have expatriated from the heartland to the coasts.

    I'm not sure how you do that.

    There seem to be a large number of people that are willing to put up with the high costs of living and regional overcrowding inherent with living on the US' coasts.

    That would be nice, but I’d settle for staunching the flow.

    The feed of media inanities from our host gets a little dull and counterproductive IMO, but I think he’s doing good work to open the eyes of heartland expats and deluded natives.

    We don’t need to live like this, and as a wise man said the people trying to tell you otherwise and make the whole country just as garbage have names and addresses.

  117. @Anonymous
    Steve Sailer:

    "So which side would the U.S. military tend to support in a battle of secessionism vs. nationalism? My impression is that the U.S. military very much enjoys representing the strongest, most ass-kicking country on earth and intends to keep the USA that way."

    And yet, the "most butt-kicking country on Earth" couldn't pacify a few thousand savages in Afghanistan even after being there for 20 years. Not to mention they couldn't beat a bunch of peasants with AK-47s in Vietnam.

    "So, if the politicians can’t agree on an amicable Czech-Slovak-style split-up, and the obvious controversies over who gets, say, the port of San Diego suggest that they won’t, then the effective decision would wind up in the hands of the hard men of the military."

    In true "democratic" fashion. Just like in all those Latin American countries you look down upon, with their tendency of the military to intervene during crisis. So America is solidly going the Banana Republic tradition...

    "And my guess is, military men like things just the way they are and have no intention of weakening America on the world stage by allowing petty politicians to split up the most awe-inspiring military in human history."

    Anyone who knows anything about military affairs would say that the most awe-inspiring militaries in history would be either the Roman Legions from the time of Caesar to Trajan, or the German Wehrmacht in WWII. In terms of quality of material, organization and efficiency man-for-man, the most awe-inspiring militaries ever would be one of those two. The U.S just throws more money into it's military than anybody else, but money does not = quality.

    And yet, the “most butt-kicking country on Earth” couldn’t pacify a few thousand savages in Afghanistan even after being there for 20 years. Not to mention they couldn’t beat a bunch of peasants with AK-47s in Vietnam.

    Yeah, the effectiveness of the U.S. military against a truly hostile American population is vastly overstated. The U.S. military couldn’t subdue much smaller and less advanced populations. And unlike in Vietnam and Afghanistan, the military would be based in hostile territory. But for any of that to happen, the population would have to be willing to turn the U.S. into Vietnam or Afghanistan. I can’t see people actually giving up lives of comfort and ease to fight the established govt.

    • Replies: @indocon
    It does not happen overnight but once the train leaves the station, there is no turning back. I grew up in an area that was fairly prosperous but descended into militancy and terrorism over just a couple of years. It all started with real grievances of a large population group with self determination DNA that were not being addressed by the political system, that will be case here in few years.

    A Joe Biden presidency will do more than anyone imagines today to push this country into real racial turmoil as whites are non stop beet up in the media, at work, in their neighborhoods, and in their pocket books.

  118. But slavery was unprofitable at more northern latitudes where blacks tended to die of respiratory infections.

    Why did they tend to die of respiratory infections? Has that changed? If so, why?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Why did they tend to die of respiratory infections? Has that changed? If so, why?
     
    Perhaps related to TB. TB is more common in dryer climates that have less rainfall than in damper climates, although this did not stop lots of famous Brits from Emily Bronte to George Orwell from dying from them.

    Many of the deaths will have been of children, since half of slaves did not survive the first year of life. Children are very vulnerable to respiratory diseases, since their breathing tubes and lungs are small. Slaves are also known to have smoked a lot of tobacco.
  119. We should stay together but completely eliminate the tyranny of the blue metropoli over the red hinterlands: change tax collection, allow more legislative autonomy, and apply electoral college voting at the county level. Virginia is a total democratic disaster apart from the guns and the constitutionality, it should not be possible for a government to behave like Richmond.

  120. @another anon
    There will be no revolution and no civil war in country where 70% of population are overweight or obese.
    Deal with it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

    https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fniallmccarthy%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F10%2F20171013_Obesity_FO.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_LrpzMCMDFI/TmBPIPdUAhI/AAAAAAAAOXA/J43Gt238HIw/s1600/trying%2Bto%2Bget%2Bfat.jpg

    “70% of population are overweight or obese”

    Or you could look at it the other way around: with over 70% of the population perforce on the sidelines, you only need a majority of the rest (~15%) to win the revolution.

    Adams (as I recall) said he won the original American War for Independence with the support of only a third of the population. So today maybe 10% is enough.

    Fatties follow the food FTW.

  121. @Almost Missouri

    "without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus."
     
    Well, that's a little unfair. Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population. Putin has no doubt skimmed something for himself, but far less than he has given back in order, defense, and knocking off competing corruption. There is something to be said for a single central authority who may be above the rules but who cares about his country (we used to call this "monarchy" and many achieved greatness) versus random rapacious moral-foreigners taking everything they can get away with, which is what Russia formerly faced and what Americans are increasingly facing.

    "And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?"
     
    Good question. Presumably, that's why they're working on a new constitution as we speak.

    "What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?"
     
    I've been hearing about this supposed post-fossil fuel world for a long time, yet it somehow keeps being just over the horizon. Sorta like fusion power. Electricity doesn't generate itself, you gotta burn something: wood, fossil, uranium, or part of the Earth's surface has to be permanently deprived of sunlight. Yeah, you can do a bit of wind or wave around the edges, but are you gonna power the global freight fleet with that?

    Meanwhile, global energy demand just keeps rising.

    Even if energy somehow becomes free—someone invents the magic Tesla reactor—Russia's domestic economy is still in decent shape, and the arms market will always demand an alternative to high-cost, high-maintenance, lots-of-strings-attached US offers. And Russia gets to operate without the ever-growing albatross of Diversity around its neck. Nowadays the US has to sprint full speed just to stay in place with its Diversity burden. Russia's chief future rival is even-less-Diverse China, not the US.

    Bonus: if global warming ever really happens, it's all upside for Russia.

    This is really moving my chairs. The Russian economy is alright, after a long war and Clintonite efforts to derail it: this suggests that not only will it not get worse but, recovering from the war and removing Obama’s completely unnecessary and pointless cold war of choice, it could get significantly better. Putting the old Arab stereotype of a one-industry nation of layabouts on Russia — the people we rely on to get into space — is dishonest but also enlightening (how diverse can goyim possibly be?). Belarus has a respectable industrial and technological capacity. In fact even the Saudis have done a lot to diversify and develop alternative talents since the 70s. The more Jack talks the more we learn about Jack.

  122. @Futurethirdworlder
    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.

    I hope Red America does sell water, food and power to Blue America. Blue gets it basically for free now, and once separated, we don’t have to buy all their Trannymania in return.

    Once the Blue urbanites’ fingers are pried loose from the real means of production, the financial realities will more closely match the natural realities.

    This is how Russia keeps Europe in line. Want power this winter, Europe? Don’t cross Russia.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    I hope Red America does sell water, food and power to Blue America.
     
    Agree, and this segues into another delusion the Left is in love with. They really seem to believe that water, electric power, gasoline, heating oil, natural gas and food just kind of magically arrive at their domicile or a store convenient to their domicile.

    In reality, almost all of these goods and services heavily depend on deplorable white males to function nationwide. Just look at the shale oil fields and tar sands, for one example.

    Shitavious and Latrina are not going to step in and save the day when these goods and services are no longer delivered to the urban centers.
  123. For instance, perhaps the worst cause of the recent unhappiness explosion in the U.S. since the Obama reelection campaign revived identity politics in 2012 is the much-exacerbated war between the sexes. But how would secession solve the problem of men and women getting on each other’s nerves?

    Red state women tend to be more conservative than their blue state counterparts; in Alabama, for instance, only around 43-43% of white women supported abortion rights circa 2019, IRRC. Red states additionally aren’t burdened by a media and political class devoted to exacerbating these issues for political and social advancement. Presumably, a newly formed Red nation could regulate this problem out of existence, something that isn’t possible in the current political framework. For instance, many European nations prohibit “hate speech.” I see no reason why a new red nation couldn’t make a list of 10 prohibited utterances and place this into the constitution. Want to claim men are privileged? Hatespeech. Have a problem with man spreading? Hatespeech. Want to presume men are guilty until proved innocent? Hatespeech, possible civil suit, too. Eventually, enough remaining leftists will be prosecuted to set a new, more harmonious, social climate. There are options available to red states in a new red nation that are not available now.

    Similarly, red and blue American states are divided less by race—while California is now only 36.8 percent white, Texas isn’t far behind at just 41.5 percent white—than by white vs. white animus.

    True. Trump underperformed among California whites but did extremely well among Alabama whites, the vast majority of whom vote republican. This could be construed as a serious intra-white split, not just a superficial ideological one. Although, it could be claimed Red State and blue state whites are more ideologically similar to each other than they are to most other racial minorities, in some respects at least. This is unfortunately not something blue state whites seem to appreciate.

    However, many Red States are demographically quite different from either Texas or California. In many Red States, the historic black / white dichotomy still applies, and racial tensions there are much different from California. So, the situation is not the same. Unless mass immigration is stopped (even if it is it won’t matter), that will change soon enough and an unacceptable individual — like Stacy Abrams — may become governor of one or many Red States, especially in the South. California doesn’t have to worry about that. The demographic situation is not analogous.

    And are Americans most irritated by their fellow Americans whom they encounter in real life, or by those they clash with in cyberspace? And if they divided up into separate geographic countries, would they then cease taunting each other online? I doubt it: The truth is, it’s fun.

    I think it’s hard to square away the idea that Americans don’t hate each other in real life with what I’ve seen over the last 20 years. Our politics is very much a representation of the current cultural mood. Consider the insanity that was the second democrat primary debate if you want to know how the other side feels about you and your issues:

    [MORE]

    ~White Issues

    401k: 0
    American workers/workers: 2 (both mentions by Yang; one was a reference to “workers on both sides”, not just Americans; both are references to trade tariffs hurting individuals and not about job preservation)
    Crime rates: 0
    Disabled/disability: 0 (astonishing considering the number of healthcare mentions)
    Farmer(s): 2 (1 Biden; 1 Butt)
    Federal debt: 1 (Harris)
    Federal deficit: 0
    [negative reference] Free trade/NAFTA/WTO/TPP etc: 0
    Housing: 0 (home prices/affordability, housing, housing prices)
    Industrial Mid-west/heartland/Rustbelt: 1 (Butt.)
    IRA: 0
    Labor, labor movement: 1 (Sanders)
    Manufacturing/manufacturers (job-related, not gun-related): 3 (Balart; Buttigieg; Swalwell)
    Middle-class/working-class/middle-income: 11
    Military family/families: 2 (both mentions by the moderator Rachel Maddow in reference to Buttigieg)
    Military experience: 1 (mentioned by moderator Rachel Maddow about Butt.’s service)
    [negative reference] Military Industrial Complex: 1 (Bernie Sanders)
    Opioid/overdose: 1 (opioid; used once by Biden)
    Retirement: 0
    Rural: 0
    Small town(s): 0
    Social Security: 3 (2 Biden; 1 Gillibrand)
    Suicide/take life: 0
    Tariff(s): 0 (pro tariff mentions by candidate)
    [negative references] Trade war/tariff(s) with China: 5 (4; Yang the Sinophile; against them, position supported by dem donors) + (1; Butt.; against them, position supported by dem donors; Butt. has a history of supporting the donors/wealthy interests)
    Tax cut: 1 (pro, for middle-class; Kamala Harris)
    Troop(s): 4 (all by white male Joe Biden)
    Union(s): 0
    Veteran(s): 3 (one is mentioned in regards to deportation of illegals; one candidate refers to himself as a veteran – Butt.)

    Race/demographics

    African American: 1 (Biden)
    Black: 7 (2 Butt.; 2 Harris; 2 debate moderator Maddow; 1 Swalwell)
    Brown v. Board of Education: 1 (Harris)
    Busing: 7 (2 Biden; 5 Harris)
    Civil rights, Civil Rights Act/activists/movement: 9 (4 Biden; 3 Harris; 1 debate moderator Maddow; 1 Sanders)
    Criminal justice / reform, justice system / reform: 3 (1 Hickenlooper; 1 Maddow; 1 Williamson)
    Discriminate, discrimination: 1 (Harris)
    Diverse, diversity: 14 (non-female related; race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, various fringe groups)
    Ferguson: 2 (Hickenlooper)
    Gerrymandering: 4 (Bennett)
    Integrate: 3 (Harris)
    Martin Luther King, Dr. King: 1 (Biden)
    Police, police accountability, police shooting: 5 (“police” shooting used in terms of race)
    Profiling: 1 (Harris)
    Officer, officer involved shooting: 6 (“officer” used in terms of race; 5 Butt.; 1 debate moderator Rachel Maddow)
    Shooting: 1 (stand-alone term; “shooting” used in terms of race; Hickenlooper)
    Race, racial, racial injustice/equality/inequality, racist: 19
    Reparations: 1 (Williamson)
    Segregate, segregation: 1 (Harris)
    Slave, slavery: 1 (Williamson)
    Voting Rights, Voting Rights Act: 4 (2 Biden; 1 Bennett; 1 Harris)
    White: 0 (in terms of positive group identity)
    [negative reference] white: … (Butt. deflected blame from an Indianapolis police shooting of a black man before the investigation was completed by pointing out the race of the police officer involved: white.)
    White nationalist / supremacist: 1 (Biden)

    Religion

    Christian/Christianity: 1 (mentioned in the context of condemning family separations of illegal alien border crossers; Butt.)
    Church: 1 (extolled the virtue of “separation of church and state”; Butt.)
    God: 2 (both mentions concerned condemning family separations; Butt.)
    Hindu:0
    Holocaust: 1 (mentioned in the context of comparing family separations of migrants with the Holocaust in Poland through the candidate’s family history; Bennett).
    Islam: 0
    Israel: 0
    Jesus: 0
    Jew/Judaism: 0
    Mohamed: 0
    Mosque: 0
    Muslim: 0
    Religion/Religious: 4 (2 mentions extolled the democrat party as standing for any or no religion; 2 mentions condemned the republican party as associating itself with religion and then separating families of illegals; all Butt.)
    Religious Freedom: 1 (mentioned in the context of the candidate’s family history / fighting childhood poverty; Bennet)
    Temple: 0
    Synagogue: 0

    Immigration

    *Didn’t bother counting, but here is a list of terms, many of which were used.

    Decriminalize, migrant, migrant families, illegal, alien, immigrant, documentation, undocumented immigrant, border, border patrol, wall, fence, security, “better life”, asylum, asylum-seeker, DACA, refugee, deport, deportation, repatriate, repatriation, child, take child from, family separation, separation, DREAM Act, dreamer, …

    *One candidate compared family separations to the Holocaust.

    Women

    Abortion, Abortion rights/services: 5 (1 Gillibrand; 1 Hickenlooper; 2 debate moderator Rachel Maddow; 1 Sanders)
    Contraception: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Diversity: 2 (Sanders; “diversity” explicitly in terms of women; this term was subtracted from the diversity race count)
    ERA: 5 (4 Biden; 1 Harris)
    Family Bill of Rights: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Georgia, other anti-abortion states: 1 (Gillibrand; states that have attempted to restrict abortion)
    Hyde Amendment: 2 (Gillibrand)
    Mother: 5 (1 Butt.; 4 Harris)
    Paid leave: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Pre-K: 2 (1 Biden; 1 Gillibrand)
    Rape: 1 (Harris)
    Roe, Roe v. Wade: 9 (2 Gillibrand; 5 debate moderator Rachel Maddow; 2 Sanders)
    Sexual abuse/assault: 1 (Harris)
    Women: 8 (“women” used as a positive group identity OR specifically pandered to as an identity group; 6 Gillibrand; 2 Sanders)
    Women’s movement: 1 (Sanders)
    Women’s reproductive freedom / health / rights: 6 (4 Gillibrand; 2 Hickenlooper)
    Woman’s right to choose, right to control her body: 3 (Sanders)

    As a separate entity, Red States would be empowered to regulate their own cultural mood just as many other countries already do. Germany, for example, heavily censors the American internet. There are many conservative YouTubers whose content is banned in that country. I see no reason why a newly formed Red nation couldn’t similarly block Salon, the Washington Post, Newsweek, and these horrible late night ideologues. Further, such states might conceivably contract with Chinese companies to fund and run their own alternative internet structure, including websites. China has some very good tech companies easily the match of Google.

    Similarly, is the threat of online censorship worse from the U.S. government or from woke multinational corporations?

    What’s the difference? If the GOP refuses to regulate them, they might as well be an arm of the government considering employees have nearly identical views as many government bureaucrats. And as The American Conservative has pointed out, there is a revolving door between government employees and Silicon Valley anyway.

    Further example from cable news: https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/23/cnn-msnbc-15-spooks-mccabe/

    Here’s one worrying trend: looming tech industry unionization by SJW employees. Question: what happens when the far left unionizes Google, Facebook, and Twitter and then demands their political enemies get deplatformed? Well, it’s already happened at Kickstarter.

    SJW joins Kickstarter.

    Former DC Editor Joins KICKSTARTER as Comics Outreach Lead

    “I am stoked to raise up the comics community, especially marginalized creators. As a queer woman of color, it’s a very personal mission of mine to highlight LGBTQIA and PoC comics writers and artists,” Zhang said in a Kickstarter Q&A announcing her hiring.”

    https://www.newsarama.com/39996-kickstarter-hires-new-comics-outreach-lead.html

    SJW Kickstarter bans normie who advocated an end to woke comic books when he tried to make his own. Excuse given: racism / marginalized groups, yada yada yada. Reality: he spoke out against them.

    DC Comics Artist Richard Pace Posts Diversity & Comics’ KickStarter Appeal Claiming He is a Liar!

    https://boundingintocomics.com/2018/10/01/dc-comics-artist-richard-pace-posts-diversity-comics-kickstarter-appeal-claiming-he-is-a-liar/

    SJWs promote “Always Punch Nazis” comic book, which they claim is “satire”. Management disagrees and terminates the project. SJWs lead putsch unionization effort in response to seize company editorial control.

    https://slate.com/technology/9/09/kickstarter-turmoil-union-drive-historic-tech-industry.html

    SJWs successfully unionize Kickstarter after SJW boycott.

    Comics Creators: Kickstarter Union Puts ACTIVISM Over PROFITS?

    Comics book creators take note: Kickstarter employees have voted to unionize, but it’s not simply because of better working conditions. Thanks to a controversial comic book funding campaign, Kickstarter employees now want the ability to help dictate the kinds of projects the company allows to be funded on the platform and they’ve said as much. … This is important when understanding what is going on with comic book crowdfunding today, and why some campaigns — like “Jawbreakers” — were cancelled with little or no explanation.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1q9UBgnxek

    There are many other examples of censorship I could give, such as former Vox employee Carlos Maza’s attempt to pressure YouTube into banning his critics. The Daily Caller has about 6 or 7 scary articles about Google employees contemplating rigging search results to hurt Donald Trump or derank news outlets they don’t like. And, of course, the establishment media is perennially running scare articles on “conspiracy theories” to pressure YouTube into censoring government critics. Do I need to provide a list of YouTubers already banned? This isn’t trivial, either. Social media is now probably more influential than cable news.

    Mozilla wants to hear your tales of YouTube radicalization so unwanted videos get censored

    https://www.rt.com/news/468789-mozilla-youtube-regret-radicalization/

    New York Times Alleges Conspiracy After Backing Boycotts of Conservative Media

    https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/08/26/hypocrisy-new-york-times-alleges-conspiracy-after-backing-boycotts-of-conservative-media/

    WaPo: America Needs Hatespeech Laws.

    “When I was a journalist, I loved Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s assertion that the Constitution and the First Amendment are not just about protecting “free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.” … I think it’s time to consider these statutes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/29/why-america-needs-hate-speech-law/

    Tell me how this doesn’t get worse. Eventually, they’ll get their way through sheer entropy if nothing else. You’ll then wish you had regulated those companies back when you had the chance. Shame on all those gatekeeping GOP outlets that took Google bribe money and did nothing. As separate countries with separate legal paradigms, Red States would be better positioned to prevent this kind of thing. The current system seems unworkable.

    If America split up, wouldn’t money continue to pour into New York and San Francisco? But then the hinterlanders couldn’t even elect a Trump as revenge upon the coastal elites.

    States like West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Arizona are pretty crucial to states like California. I don’t see how Red States can’t just extract additional funds through something akin to price gouging. Want water? Pay me. Want heating oil? Pay me. Want coal? Double or nothing. Red states aren’t without their means of revenge should they decide to go down that road. Further, states like California heavily depend upon emigration. As a separate country, I’d bet on California being somewhat less attractive as a destination, despite the good weather; even now California isn’t a good destination for middle-class whites as huge numbers are fleeing the state. Over time, most of its tech industry would also probably migrate to China. That’d be revenge enough for Red States, not that “revenge” is really what they want anyway – something I think the ruling class forgets or misunderstands. Most red state types would tolerate blue states and their politics if they weren’t under such assault demographically and culturally.

    Lastly, I don’t see how a smart Red State leader couldn’t just enact his own revenge on coastal elites through political interference. The president of Redstan might secretly fund racial identity groups, mass immigration groups and others with the purpose of sowing dissent. Maybe he gets an initiative on a ballot somewhere calling for Zimbabwe-style land appropriations from ritzy white blue areas by poor minorities who’ll be a significant force in some bluestan combinations.

    And then there are the practical questions of how to divide up a huge country, ones that Buckley skims over.

    These are difficult but not insurmountable problems. Presumably, this could be addressed at a constitutional convention. First, a few proposals would be floated, and then experts would address the pros and cons of each. The important thing isn’t to solve every issue in advance but to acknowledge the problem in the first place. Solutions will then follow.

    For example, where, exactly, do you draw the border? Buckley’s book only features one map, showing the Republican-Democrat divide in the 2016 election at the county level. But it’s hard to imagine how to draw new national boundaries that would divide leftist urban centers from their own rightist exurbs.

    It is not necessary to remove all red areas from blue or blue from red. Partition could happen along a periphery county or state level. The matter is up for negotiation. The point is merely to preserve majority red voting power within large georaphic areas currently identified as Red. After, Red States would be empowered through a new constitution to deplatform and slowly remove the most toxic blue elements (Antifa, ADL, SPLC, BLM, SJWs, feminists). Many extreme leftists would voluntarily leave as the government cracks down on their comforts and political expression, a solution vaguely similar to your own self-deportation solution to illegal immigration from years back, if I recall.

    Ex: Red States could ban things SJW whites like (feminism) or promote things they hate (traditional culture) and they would then slowly leave over time as a result, perhaps faster if given an economic incentive. Over time, those interior urban blue areas would become purple again. The situation will slowly fix itself. This option could be part of a deal made between reds and blues: red states get reds to replace blues and vice versa. Of course, it’s not that easy, but population transfers can work over a period of say 20 years with economic incentives. It could even be voluntary.

    Dividing along partisan lines of geography would create an extremely complicated map with national borders typically drawn a few dozen miles outside of civic centers,

    Not necessarily. You don’t have to partition every city and country. Red will get some blue and blue will get some red. A compromise between parties can be reached through negotiation. In any case, this could still work with just a few, or even a single, red state leaving the union. That seems easy enough to contemplate. Many of these states are the size of some European countries.

    Moreover, whites tend to become Democrats or Republicans depending upon whether they live in cities or the countryside.

    Does it matter? What stops a strong Red State central government from lording it over bluer metropolitan areas? Further, and this is indeed an interesting point: future (perhaps even present) advancements in DNA testing might allow Red States to selectively emigrate some number of whites whose conservatism is genetically influenced; about half of political persuasion is hereditary. Say a single red state, Alabama, seceded. That state has a land area approximately 30% greater than South Korea but only around a tenth of the population. There’s lots of room there to grow. Importing just a small fraction of outside Red State / Trump voters and independents based on a combination of genetic and psychological testing could produce a population essentially immune to liberalism, regardless of residence. I don’t see why this couldn’t be an option.

    Israel is a fairly small place, but the point is that Jews have a homeland where they are free to express themselves and not be dominated by foreign racists. The psychological stress of living in the United States as it is now is almost overwhelming, and it’s not just social media. Conservatives need just a single state to make this work.

    And then there’s the question of what to do with American military assets

    Sell most of it, keep some of it, rely on non-convention deterrence for the rest. Anyway, this is a comparatively smaller issue that could be negotiated at a constitutional convention. It ranks far below other issues. I don’t think Tennessee is going to war with Minnesota over an aircraft carrier.

    In truth, however, the likely answer to the question of “Who would be willing to fight?” is the military servicemen who signed up to fight for the USA.

    There are other ways besides fighting. The constitutional convention solution would legitimize a peaceful breakup without war. The various parts of the Soviet Union didn’t resort to large-scale warfare as it disintegrated. And as others have pointed out, Red States could simply secede on their own through state legislatures, and then dare the Union to attack after purging their police and national guards. My bet is that blue state types aren’t going to risk a disruption of their flow of creature comforts to fight Arkansas. They’ll be acrimony at first, and then they’ll get used to the idea.

    And as you pointed out, “who would be willing to fight?” Red states are as large as some European countries. Does this empire really have the manpower – white male – to conquer and hold those areas against even moderate determination for long without also losing face globally and maybe even being kicked out of Japan and South Korea once pictures of the airforce bombing civilians in Tuscaloosa comes out? Yes, they could send in Hispanic and black reservists, but the British made a similar mistake during the Revolutionary War by promising black slaves freedom; it turned former loyalist whites against them and turned the conflict racial.

    So, secession is not going to happen.

    We’ll see soon enough once Texas and Georgia flip blue and democrats send in the National Guard to arrest and jail gun owners. Think this is impossible? Beto O’rouke’s debate statement begs to differ. And then there’s the recent actions of newly-elected democrats in Virginia. I wouldn’t count out secession if current negative trends hold constant, and there are many of them. Maybe also something unexpected happens like Adam Schiff provoking a conflict with Russia and getting a lot of white Red State gentiles killed, provoking a retaliation against his home state.

    Or course, it’s always possible the red state conservative stereotype of “sit back and grill” turns out true. In that case, the Union has nothing to worry about unless the supply of beef and pork runs low.

    I think Steve’s objections here can best be summed up with the following quote from The Z-Blog:

    Those old enough to remember that time and what it was like to feel genuine love of country, should be forgiven for not wanting to close the door on it. … Old people should not be so quick to condemn the young people for mocking Baby Boomers or criticizing civic nationalism. At the root of that mockery is a bitterness at knowing they can never experience what their ancestors experienced. … Your past is now alien to you.

    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    Less talk, more manspreading.
  124. @Anon7
    Democrats try to pretend that it is about 1850, and PoC minorities and women ("black bodies", "our bodies, ourselves") are in horrific actual bondage to white male masters.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help ("right to bear arms") and doctors don't know anything anyway ("no, I don't want to pay for national health care").

    I found myself thinking about this more than a decade ago, when I noticed that the Republican and Democrat parties seemed to be in a branding and advertising war.

    In branding and advertising, you choose a mental/emotional division, on one side there are your customers and on the other, people who aren't likely to buy your product anyway.

    What is the most emotional division our country went through? The Civil war. So, that's how we brand in political fights.

    No, I don't think a break-up is in the cards, mostly because the Left wants that power! All of it. Besides, would you divvy up the national debt? Divvy up the nukes? That would be great, California governors with their own nuclear weapons.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help (“right to bear arms”) and doctors don’t know anything anyway (“no, I don’t want to pay for national health care”).

    “National health care” means half the healthcare at five times the cost. Why would anyone want that? And why would anyone want to further empower the central government by handing it an extra two trillion dollars per year? It’s elementary that “national health care” would be a disaster for white Americans.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  125. @another anon
    There will be no revolution and no civil war in country where 70% of population are overweight or obese.
    Deal with it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

    https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fniallmccarthy%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F10%2F20171013_Obesity_FO.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_LrpzMCMDFI/TmBPIPdUAhI/AAAAAAAAOXA/J43Gt238HIw/s1600/trying%2Bto%2Bget%2Bfat.jpg

    The cheltingham wainscoting imposed on us by an insane elite determined to do so will be an Irish-style series or atmosphere of precisely planned targeted but limited violence and prankery by independent and unrelated people, a Harry Tuttle shadow career and not a Napoleonic martial campaign. Notice how the EU and even the Germans learned to respect Greeks after Greeks overpowered (but did not kill) armored riot police. Imagine an overweight but knowledgeable infrastructural worker messing with the infrastructure. In other words major parts of it literally could be done by the people in your picture.

  126. Any good reason why it should stay together?

  127. @Jack D
    As I said, Putin stabilized things but starting from a very low base. The fertility you give is still below replacement, albeit not as low as before. Having an income that is 37% of the US average (while better than having one that is 14% of the US average) is nothing to write home about. Let's take away 2/3rds of you income and let me know if that is "satisfactory" to you. Russia is a vast nation brimming with potential wealth - enormous natural resources (not just oil), not very crowded, a white population and yet the average Russian lives in Mexican level poverty because the place has always been misruled.

    Having an income that is 37% of the US average (while better than having one that is 14% of the US average) is nothing to write home about

    It was actually 44% ‘ere you bracket out the fuel and mineral exports. Maddison’s compilation of data allows you to compare Tsarist Russia (1886-1916), Soviet Russia (1917-91) , and post-Communist Russia (1992-) with Britain and the United States (making use of Britain as the gold standard prior to 1914 and the United States after). For the period running from 1886 to 1913, the only period in which that ratio was higher ran from 1905 to 1907. For the period running from 1914 to the present, the ratio was higher from 1961 to 1993, with the peak around 1980 + / – 5 years.

    What you write home about depends on what home’s like. Most of the world has lower real income levels than does Russia today. So did the United States as recently as 1967.

  128. Anonymous[148] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    California has natural defensible barriers like the Sierra Nevadas, along with sea lanes and trade links all over the world. This means it can be endlessly resupplied and easily defended. The same goes for the Bos-Wash corridor, with the Appalachian range and access to sea and trade links.

    The red states in the middle lack natural barriers and access to trade and supply routes. The farmland would be vulnerable to herbicides, napalm, and the like, and the red states would not have the trade links to be easily resupplied.

    So while the blue states are more urbanized and may have a softer population, logistics would be a major vulnerability for the red states.

    • LOL: Realist
  129. @Almost Missouri

    "without that oil money Russia is just an oversized Belarus."
     
    Well, that's a little unfair. Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population. Putin has no doubt skimmed something for himself, but far less than he has given back in order, defense, and knocking off competing corruption. There is something to be said for a single central authority who may be above the rules but who cares about his country (we used to call this "monarchy" and many achieved greatness) versus random rapacious moral-foreigners taking everything they can get away with, which is what Russia formerly faced and what Americans are increasingly facing.

    "And will Putinism survive Putin? What happens when Putin finally kicks off?"
     
    Good question. Presumably, that's why they're working on a new constitution as we speak.

    "What is the future for Russia in a post-fossil fuel world?"
     
    I've been hearing about this supposed post-fossil fuel world for a long time, yet it somehow keeps being just over the horizon. Sorta like fusion power. Electricity doesn't generate itself, you gotta burn something: wood, fossil, uranium, or part of the Earth's surface has to be permanently deprived of sunlight. Yeah, you can do a bit of wind or wave around the edges, but are you gonna power the global freight fleet with that?

    Meanwhile, global energy demand just keeps rising.

    Even if energy somehow becomes free—someone invents the magic Tesla reactor—Russia's domestic economy is still in decent shape, and the arms market will always demand an alternative to high-cost, high-maintenance, lots-of-strings-attached US offers. And Russia gets to operate without the ever-growing albatross of Diversity around its neck. Nowadays the US has to sprint full speed just to stay in place with its Diversity burden. Russia's chief future rival is even-less-Diverse China, not the US.

    Bonus: if global warming ever really happens, it's all upside for Russia.

    Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population.

    No clue how valid this index is

    https://www.transparency.org/cpi2019

    just to note they rank White Russia as 66th out of 180 in terms of their homebrew corruption index (with the low numbers posited as the least corrupt). Russia ranks 137th. The World Bank data indicates that domestic product per capita in real terms has quadrupled since 1995. (The country suffered a severe depression from 1991-95). It’s a middle-income country now. Walter Lacquer called the place ‘a Soviet Vendee’.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Lol, maybe I've been unfair to Belarus now. I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states. Well, maybe that's politically, but economically they match Russia by prostituting out their infrastructure to the West?

    "No clue how valid this index is"
     
    I've wondered for a long time too, and I suspect that a lot has to with how pro-Western they are, irrespective of their internal "transparency" and "fairness". My impression is that Ukraine and Belarus send migrants to Russia much more than Russia sends migrants to them, so it is hard to square that with the idea that Russia is objectively in worse shape, else the human flows would reverse.
  130. GU says:
    @Herp McDerp
    Smaller countries are happier ...

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries' citizens are so happy that they're invading us by the millions.

    ... and less corrupt.

    Assumes facts not in evidence! (And if Chicago became its own country, would that magically make it less corrupt?)

    They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily ...

    They’re also more inclined to be conquered and exploited when larger countries throw their weight around militarily.

    ...and they’re freer.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap'n Crunch takes over.

    If we simply went back to 19th century federalism and constitutional principles, a lot of problems would be solved. Maybe we split up a few states as well to better reflect shared culture.

    It wouldn’t solve the “diversity” problem the U.S. is facing, but it would still help to have Congress and the Executive branch keeping their noses out of local matters. Remember, before the 3rd world invasion, when the U.S. was 90%+ white, whites in different regions thought they were SO DIFFERENT from each other (see also European history). State and local governance of most issues avoided lots of bickering. The biggest obstacle today, besides the deep state not wanting to relinquish their power, is the mafia-like levels of corruption among state and local politicians and the public sector unions they serve.

  131. @Futurethirdworlder
    Sure secede down to the individual, every man an Island unto himself. But then how would you defend against an enemy Nation that looks upon this land of atomized individuals as easy pickings? Well you'd have to unify and raise the money to build a military.

    Organising collective security in the absence of a parasitic government has been a solved problem for over 1000 years. It was already solved when Molinari wrote “The Production of Security” in 1849.

    The túath system in Ireland – a system of voluntary association, private law, and no taxation – managed to defend itself from invasion by England for 600 years. The Icelandic Commonwealth[1] – very specifically a voluntary panarchy – lasted for longer than the US has lasted to date.

    And of course there’s the Pashtun, who have just beaten the 4th Empire who tried to take their (rather meagre) shit. In their natural state, the jirga system does fuck-all interference in the average citizen’s lives – but if someone turns up uninvited the Pashtun sort that shit out.

    Folks who get a damp patch in their knickers over putative martial prowess of standing militaries, fail to understand that despite their “might” they are the underdog in 4G war. Arreguín-Toft’s “How the Weak Win Wars” [2] is ~20 pages, and ought to be mandatory reading (before people go further and flesh it out with, say, John Robb and William S Lind).

    Damp-patch dead-enders always fall for some version of the ‘stab in the back‘ theory: “If we had gone all out, we would have won“, ignoring that the prize would have been ruined in the process. The French call it jusquauboutism – the Frogs have a shitty grasp of sunk cost, yet even they have a pejorative for dead-enderism.

    [1] People who take an interest in this stuff also refer to it as the Icelandic Free State, which is a better fit with the etymology of the Icelandic þjóðveldiðþjóð: people (also land, nation); veldið: regime (cognate of veldi: power) although auto-translate renders þjóðveldi as ‘Commonwealth’ nowadays.

    [2] Arreguín-Toft, I (2001) How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric ConflictInternational Security, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Summer 2001), pp. 93–128

    • Thanks: SOL
    • Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
    Imagine thinking that the issue of national defense was solved 50 years before the airplane was invented.
  132. Steve ended his article with, “So, secession is not going to happen.”

    Which is, IMO, 100% accurate. Too many powerful people have a vested interest in keeping the US whole, and it is very easy to get public opinion set against the section wishing to leave. During the War of 1812, Thomas Jefferson noted it would be far easier to raise troops to invade New England than to fight Great Britain. This was during the first secession crisis the young nation faced, as Jefferson’s embargo was disastrous for New England shipping and associated trades.

    Secession was carried out only once in our history, and you may argue all day about why the states seceded, but the war took place because of secession. Legislators and newspaper editors that had decried the Constitution as a pact with the devil the day before were calling for an invasion to put down the rebellion the next.

  133. @indocon
    If you talk to people in Quebec today, they are very happy with the current situation, with their language requirements they have kept out the hordes that are busting at the seams in places like Toronto and Vancouver, they have a very good trained workforce in high demand areas like SW programming, this allows their kids to stay close while still earn a good living.

    with their language requirements they have kept out the hordes that are busting at the seams in places like Toronto and Vancouver

    Interesting point. Quebec has been able to use its off-brand language and culture as a barrier to globalism.

    For better or worse, English is the world’s second language. This is no doubt one of the reasons the U.S./U.K./Canada are such especially attractive targets for immigration.

  134. @Almost Missouri
    I hope Red America does sell water, food and power to Blue America. Blue gets it basically for free now, and once separated, we don't have to buy all their Trannymania in return.

    Once the Blue urbanites' fingers are pried loose from the real means of production, the financial realities will more closely match the natural realities.

    This is how Russia keeps Europe in line. Want power this winter, Europe? Don't cross Russia.

    I hope Red America does sell water, food and power to Blue America.

    Agree, and this segues into another delusion the Left is in love with. They really seem to believe that water, electric power, gasoline, heating oil, natural gas and food just kind of magically arrive at their domicile or a store convenient to their domicile.

    In reality, almost all of these goods and services heavily depend on deplorable white males to function nationwide. Just look at the shale oil fields and tar sands, for one example.

    Shitavious and Latrina are not going to step in and save the day when these goods and services are no longer delivered to the urban centers.

  135. @Not my economy
    Doesn’t work if country people don’t actually have the balls and the organization to shut off the power and food

    Not sure about the food, but shutting off power is laughably easy and wouldn’t take much in the way of organization. Probably a dozen IQ 115-ish rednecks could do it were they to go at it intentionally, and nearly any significant city-country conflict will take out the power grid as collateral damage even if they’re not trying to do so. It really is that brittle. Power (and water in a lot of critical places) isn’t something that requires even 10% of the population to be in a revolutionary mood to interrupt, it is a lot more fragile than that.

    • Replies: @Not my economy
    Of course it’s easy as a technical problem. That’s not the point. How do those dozen rednecks meet each other? But let’s assume this away.

    For it to matter from the point of view of a war, the city people have to know who took out their power and why. There has to be somebody or group they can appeal to, to get it back, somebody to negotiate with.

    1. Cut the power
    2. Cities burn, absolute chaos
    3. Rural areas marginally less chaotic, but still basically a total disaster
    4. ???????
    5. Country boys now operate the levers of power

    Fill in the blank

  136. @Anon
    Breaking up the US suffers from the same problem that recent proposals to establish from scratch one or more new full-blown, but non-woke, universities, funded by a conservative billionaire. Short of some sort of apartheid, how do you prevent eventual woke-ification? Certain things could be put in a hard to change constitution, but still ...

    By the way, someone pointed something out to me the other day that I had never noticed: The right has co-opted the word "woke," as they did with "fake news," originally a lefty coinage, until Trump decided it was useful. There is a definite smell of ridicule to"woke" now.

    It’s been said that you can kill a man, but not kill an idea. The principles of liberals and normie conservativism must be discredited and destroyed.

    The extreme egalitarianism of today’s West and the idea that people are alike all over, want the same things and are capable of the same things, must be tossed into the ashcan of history. How we do it is another story.

    Redstan would look like the America of our childhood – overwhelmingly White and culturally Christian. Bluestan would be populated by every race, ethnicity, religion, sex and sexual proclivity on the planet and they would tear each other apart in the battle for dominance.

    The liberal Age of the Enlightenment is dying and Age of Demography is being born.

  137. @Known Fact
    Gold, silver or at least toilet paper

    Exactly. Embossed, stamped, and chipped toilet paper, backed by … you guessed it, Gold or Silver.

    Oh, gotta go to the bathroom? Use those old 5’s and 10’s – Lincoln and Hamilton have always absorbed the most fecal matter.

  138. @Jack D
    Right but these people are not original thinkers - they are just followers. If the Party Line was something different, they would fall into place. Better yet, just get rid of their jobs - who needs a Dept. of Sociology anyway? Let these folks get honest paying work as baristas at Starbucks. If we really need Sociology, we can start over fresh with people who are not sworn enemies of America.

    And the Chinese understand that you only need to kill 1 chicken to scare all the monkeys. These folks are spouting nonsense now because, not only are they not punished for it, they are rewarded. If you changed the incentive structure and provided a few examples of what happens to people who promote hatred of Western civilization, they would shut up right quick.

    The Whites in Russia thought that they could set up a few enclaves that could withstand Communist domination. This was not tenable and neither is splitting up America. The South tried that once and it didn't work then either. Or look at Taiwan (while it still exists). The Communists got the entire mainland and the right was left with a little island. Who is the world power now? The only winning strategy is to go for the whole enchilada. "Half a loaf is better than none" is false because the other side is not going to let you keep your half of the loaf.

    Now how do you go for the prize in a democracy when you have been demographically outnumbered by imported ringers? The answer (see Communist China, Communist anywhere) is that you get rid of democracy, not that you split up the country.

    “The Whites in Russia thought that they could set up a few enclaves that could withstand Communist domination. This was not tenable and neither is splitting up America. The South tried that once and it didn’t work then either. Or look at Taiwan (while it still exists). The Communists got the entire mainland and the right was left with a little island. Who is the world power now? The only winning strategy is to go for the whole enchilada. “Half a loaf is better than none” is false because the other side is not going to let you keep your half of the loaf.

    Now how do you go for the prize in a democracy when you have been demographically outnumbered by imported ringers? The answer (see Communist China, Communist anywhere) is that you get rid of democracy, not that you split up the country.”

    This is an interesting point, and one of the few apparently substantial arguments against separation. But, as your examples show, no solution is final. The Red pullback from the coasts is a consolidation to make a capable state free from the missteps of the 20th century. The DC/NY/LA-free US would still be a superpower, and should DC/NY/LA choose to defy it, they will likely have the experience that Georgia did when it recklessly defied Russia a decade back. Killing that one chicken did indeed scare all the monkeys.

    And the Red America need not formally reconquer the coastal trading enclaves. China benefited and still benefits from having Hong Kong as a separate-system trading entrepot to the outside, as the Arab peninsula benefits from Dubai, and the UK benefits from its various extra-territorial havens. The entrepot merchants know the score: business stays good while they don’t upset their big neighbor/sponsor. DC/NY/LA can have infinity immigration, endless welfare, central bank theft, race-spoils rules superseding the Constitution, anal pride parades, and high taxes if it suits them. They just can’t force it on the rest of America. What’s wrong with that?

    I suspect that once DC/NY/LA are self-contained and the costs of their vices can no longer be passed off to a compliant interior, they will suddenly lose their enthusiasm for most of them. Otherwise, with a refreshed white supermajority in Red America and infinite immigration in DC/NY/LA, it is the latter who will have to face tough questions about whether they can remain democratic.

  139. @The Wild Geese Howard

    Among some white liberals I know, there is this notion that they have control over drones and nuclear weapons, with that they can beat the white deplorable’s in the countryside, they really believe in that TV series Hunt stuff.
     
    They also seem to have this delusion that the police and military, with their deplorable-funded salaries, will always do liberal bidding and squash any uppity deplorables.

    They don't seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don't seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.

    They don’t seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don’t seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.

    Translation: House niggers gon’ raaaahz up, put Massah in dey place.

    Cool story, bro.

    Never gonna happen – if government ever tells their goons to turn on the populace, they will do so.

    They pretty much always have – from the Whiskey Rebellion & Shay’s Rebellion, to the Bonus Army, to Kent State.

    And that’s before considering situations in which the House Niggers could tell themselves that the impending dead weren’t real Murkins – Sherman’s March to the Sea and devastation of Atlanta and Savannah; the use of air-launched incendiaries during the MOVE standoff in Philly in 1985; Waco; Ruby Ridge.

    Back-shooting Baby-killer coward Lon Horiuchi is a much better example of what to expect.

    If SGHTF* anyone in BDUs should be considered hostile; anyone whose current job involves wearing gaylord SWAT kit should be targeted in their homes (people know where they live); MRAPS should be IEDed or RPGd.

    The House Niggers aren’t on our side now: as it stands they are happy caging people for shit that they know is bullshit, and killing people they don’t know for reasons they know are bullshit. That’s not someone you want on your side, believe me: they will be the first-rank of looters.

    * Shit Genuinely Hits The Fan.

    • Replies: @donvonburg
    I'm sure that Jeff Cooper would be dismayed to know that Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi still walks the earth, even if he does mostly confine himself to Hawaii. I guarantee he'd need Secret Service Presidential Protection Team level security to exist very long in some of the places I've lived. I'm sure he knows there are more than a few people who would not mind their epitaph being the guy who, well, you know.
    , @J.Ross
    Standards and practices, multiple uses throughout, this #%&&@ be movin' all my chairs. Is moderation just delay?
  140. One really minor point, Steve, is that the Gulf Coast is not less densely populated due to the hurricane threat. Hurricanes can and do come to the Atlantic coast of Florida, and the outer banks of N. Carolina just as much as some of the Gulf Coast locations. The whole Tampa Bay area (Gulf Coast) is very populated now, from New Port Richey way down to Naples, and Pensacola east to Panama City.

    No, the less densely populated parts of the coast are simply where there are no beaches. There is good fishing and reasonable land prices down in Suwannee County, Florida for example, but no sandy beaches mean not so many people move there.

  141. @Art Deco
    Belarus is wantonly corrupt and the government shows no sign of caring about the population.

    No clue how valid this index is

    https://www.transparency.org/cpi2019

    just to note they rank White Russia as 66th out of 180 in terms of their homebrew corruption index (with the low numbers posited as the least corrupt). Russia ranks 137th. The World Bank data indicates that domestic product per capita in real terms has quadrupled since 1995. (The country suffered a severe depression from 1991-95). It's a middle-income country now. Walter Lacquer called the place 'a Soviet Vendee'.

    Lol, maybe I’ve been unfair to Belarus now. I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states. Well, maybe that’s politically, but economically they match Russia by prostituting out their infrastructure to the West?

    “No clue how valid this index is”

    I’ve wondered for a long time too, and I suspect that a lot has to with how pro-Western they are, irrespective of their internal “transparency” and “fairness”. My impression is that Ukraine and Belarus send migrants to Russia much more than Russia sends migrants to them, so it is hard to square that with the idea that Russia is objectively in worse shape, else the human flows would reverse.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states.

    The Russian nationalists on his boards (and he himself) would prefer to not acknowledge what surveys and election results make clear in the Ukraine - Ukrainians are just not into them and persist in regarding Ukraine as here and Russia as there. The Russophile parties won 13% of the vote last July and a merger of Ukraine and Russia (or eastern Ukraine and Russia) is a minority view even in that set.

    White Russia has a much larger russophile strain, but the share of the population who favor merger with Russia is half what it was 25 years ago.
    , @hhsiii
    My father-in-law owns a hotel and some properties and businesses (like a bodega) in Belarus, in Verkhnedvinsk. Very hard to get good help. People don't really want to work. He's got a nice house, deep well, with a greenhouse full of cucumbers and tomatoes, and in the summer apples, plums, currants, strawberries, etc. all in the back yard. Plus a Banya out back.
  142. @Joe Stalin
    "One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist."

    "5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can’t do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc."

    Exactly right. That's why the biggest joke here is how VA militia should just surrender because the gun controllers have a NG in which they could just bomb and bomb and they would be defeated.

    Israel contracted decades ago with the engineering firm Sargent & Lundy to design power transmission towers that would remain standing if one of the legs were blown off. The US military attacked Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War power transmission towers with cruise missiles equipped with carbon fiber strands that when dropped on transmission towers would create a short circuit through plasma when they vaporized. Just think what modern consumer drones could do carrying spools of wire to the cosmopolitans waiting for their easy victory over red America in their Democrat controlled urban areas. At ground level, even a commercially available antenna launcher could be pressed service to knock out power transmission.

    The economic costs of blue America war on red America would be like in THX 1138 where it just wouldn't be worth it to the the State.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHuzVcfwE28
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDC_ecmQET8
    [1:50]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKcFNSgd6Q

    The ease with which key networks can be disrupted, is one of the pieces of evidence[1] that supports my “Global terrrrrist networks are bullshit” hypothesis.

    If something akin to the mythical al-Qa’eda existed, major American cities would go through random periods where they went without electricity, water, and communications for weeks on end; major parts of transportation networks would blow up randomly (including the major underground pipeliness that take fuel to airports[1]); there would be phylloxera in all wine-growing areas and PCBs (or dimethyl mercury) in the water … and so on and so forth.

    Given how geographically distributed the keys nodes are, Federal and State governments would be bankrupted just from the costs of ‘hardening’ critical infrastructure against a few hundred genuinely-committed, adequately-resourced and willing-to-die insurgents.

    A globe-spanning organisation wasting resources by trying to blow up enemy civilians a few dozen at a time, is so fucking stupid (tactically, strategically, and in terms of relevance to goals and OODA loops) that it is only ever done by governments.

    .

    [1] The primary dot-point is – obviously – that none of the neocon ‘thought leaders’ has been assassinated.

    [2] Everybody knows where these pipelines are.

  143. @Almost Missouri
    Lol, maybe I've been unfair to Belarus now. I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states. Well, maybe that's politically, but economically they match Russia by prostituting out their infrastructure to the West?

    "No clue how valid this index is"
     
    I've wondered for a long time too, and I suspect that a lot has to with how pro-Western they are, irrespective of their internal "transparency" and "fairness". My impression is that Ukraine and Belarus send migrants to Russia much more than Russia sends migrants to them, so it is hard to square that with the idea that Russia is objectively in worse shape, else the human flows would reverse.

    I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states.

    The Russian nationalists on his boards (and he himself) would prefer to not acknowledge what surveys and election results make clear in the Ukraine – Ukrainians are just not into them and persist in regarding Ukraine as here and Russia as there. The Russophile parties won 13% of the vote last July and a merger of Ukraine and Russia (or eastern Ukraine and Russia) is a minority view even in that set.

    White Russia has a much larger russophile strain, but the share of the population who favor merger with Russia is half what it was 25 years ago.

  144. @Futurethirdworlder
    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.

    Good luck convincing everyone in the republican minority not to sell their water, food and power to the liberal urbanites at a comfy profit.

    Yes, greed rules in this country.

  145. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    And one more telling reality – in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    I go in my garage every day, but so far as I know, I am still not an automobile.

    Texas itself is pretty polarized. Carroll Shelby famously said the difference between East Texas and West Texas was chicken salad vs. chicken shit. Austin is the capital, and is proudly one of the weirdest cities in the United States even by Texas standards. The only reason that it’s still one state and not five is that they so far have agreed to stay together under the American republic/empire. That even could change.

    I agree Texas has some really solid Christians but they have a lot more of misguided ones, and a lot more people who go to church because it’s the place to be on Sunday. The sheer heresy, greed, nonsense and plain insanity that Texas televangelists crank out on a daily basis is astounding. If you challenge the Prosperity Gospel message or the Christian Zionist, dispensationalist message in some places, you probably could get killed.

    And there is a major mestizo revanchist movement in much of south Texas, now that the gringos have built roads navigable by lowriders, put in electric power and plumbing and most importantly kept the Comanches from killing and eating them.

  146. @Wency
    The cities are where the money is, and the troops will follow the money. The rural areas prevailing only makes possible sense in a scenario where the US military is first dissolved. American rural folk are not Pashtun tribesmen.

    The cities are where the money is, and the troops will follow the money.

    Most troops are from rural areas.

  147. @Redneck farmer
    And frankly, while most enlisted are "red", many officers are "blue". So the military wouldn't be quite as effective as it could be in any breakup.

    most enlisted are “red”

    Most white enlisted. Even that’s changing, though.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Do you have any up-to-date info on the demographic makeup of the various SpecOps forces and combat pilots? The latest data I can find is from 2015, and the snakeeaters and frogmen were overwhelmingly pale and male at that time.
  148. @Kratoklastes

    They don’t seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don’t seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.
     
    Translation: House niggers gon' raaaahz up, put Massah in dey place.

    Cool story, bro.

    Never gonna happen - if government ever tells their goons to turn on the populace, they will do so.

    They pretty much always have - from the Whiskey Rebellion & Shay's Rebellion, to the Bonus Army, to Kent State.

    And that's before considering situations in which the House Niggers could tell themselves that the impending dead weren't real Murkins - Sherman's March to the Sea and devastation of Atlanta and Savannah; the use of air-launched incendiaries during the MOVE standoff in Philly in 1985; Waco; Ruby Ridge.

    Back-shooting Baby-killer coward Lon Horiuchi is a much better example of what to expect.

    If SGHTF* anyone in BDUs should be considered hostile; anyone whose current job involves wearing gaylord SWAT kit should be targeted in their homes (people know where they live); MRAPS should be IEDed or RPGd.

    The House Niggers aren't on our side now: as it stands they are happy caging people for shit that they know is bullshit, and killing people they don't know for reasons they know are bullshit. That's not someone you want on your side, believe me: they will be the first-rank of looters.

    * Shit Genuinely Hits The Fan.

    I’m sure that Jeff Cooper would be dismayed to know that Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi still walks the earth, even if he does mostly confine himself to Hawaii. I guarantee he’d need Secret Service Presidential Protection Team level security to exist very long in some of the places I’ve lived. I’m sure he knows there are more than a few people who would not mind their epitaph being the guy who, well, you know.

  149. @Almost Missouri
    Lol, maybe I've been unfair to Belarus now. I based my opinion on reading Anatoly who seems to regard Ukraine and Belraus as fake pretender states. Well, maybe that's politically, but economically they match Russia by prostituting out their infrastructure to the West?

    "No clue how valid this index is"
     
    I've wondered for a long time too, and I suspect that a lot has to with how pro-Western they are, irrespective of their internal "transparency" and "fairness". My impression is that Ukraine and Belarus send migrants to Russia much more than Russia sends migrants to them, so it is hard to square that with the idea that Russia is objectively in worse shape, else the human flows would reverse.

    My father-in-law owns a hotel and some properties and businesses (like a bodega) in Belarus, in Verkhnedvinsk. Very hard to get good help. People don’t really want to work. He’s got a nice house, deep well, with a greenhouse full of cucumbers and tomatoes, and in the summer apples, plums, currants, strawberries, etc. all in the back yard. Plus a Banya out back.

  150. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    LOL.

    Non-Hispanic whites are like 30% of new births in Texas, my dude.

    It’s not 1927 anymore.

    Peak Boomer delusion. And by the way, Mexicans (I mean Tejanos) don’t care one whit about your macho posturing about muh texan values. they just cringe and then pop out 7 babies and bring all their cousins over while you boast about 75% church attendance.

  151. Anonymous[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.
     
    Yes, in the long run Europe prospered even more once it was free of Roman occupation. The only problem was that the "long run" required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization. When it came to things like plumbing and roads, Roman levels were not achieved again until the late 19th century. If getting rid of the "despicable Whites" (each side thinks that the other side's whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I'm not sure the game is worth the candle.

    The only problem was that the “long run” required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization.

    It turns out that isn’t true. That’s what we were taught but historians have always known better. There were definitely a few generations in certain parts where things got bad. But the 1,000 years of darkness is myth. In fact the whole term “dark ages“ was invented in the renaissance to disparage the middle ages.

    A medieval army of 1100 A.D. would’ve destroyed a Roman army of similar size.

    • Replies: @Wency
    The Romans had an urban culture and a centralized system of administration, resulting in more specialization and many impressive accomplishments in various fields, some of which were not paralleled until after the end of the Middle Ages. Medieval Europe was not so urban -- more people lived in rural areas engaged in agriculture. Yet, especially in Northern Europe, that agriculture was more efficient due to various innovations and inventions.

    The result is that, depending on the Malthusian moment, medieval Europeans were either more numerous or better fed than Roman-ruled peoples. It seems to me that Roman urbanization had to have been funded by an agricultural population (much of it enslaved) that lived at a less-than-subsistence level, and the inevitable breakdown of this system was a key component of Rome's decline.
  152. Shaniqua Goldblum here…

    yes, break up along racial lines. the sooner the better. access to White people is not a human right.

  153. @SFG
    I see this suggestion on left-wing boards as well, with titles like 'let's get rid of Dixie' or 'New England should free itself'.

    Thing is, it's always more exciting to the 10% on the ideological extremes. There's a large lump of people in the middle who are not particularly energized about politics, thinks we have a problem with PC *and* racism (80% answered 'yes' to each question in that recent Pew survey, so that's at least 60% overlap), and wishes the pussy-hats and 4channers would disappear and leave them alone.

    It’s not really that balanced though. I can switch on the TV and be assailed with the objective fact of PC/woke bollocks. While the ‘racism’ is largely mythical and anecdotal – kept alive only by enthusiastic media reinforcement.

  154. @Jehu
    Not sure about the food, but shutting off power is laughably easy and wouldn't take much in the way of organization. Probably a dozen IQ 115-ish rednecks could do it were they to go at it intentionally, and nearly any significant city-country conflict will take out the power grid as collateral damage even if they're not trying to do so. It really is that brittle. Power (and water in a lot of critical places) isn't something that requires even 10% of the population to be in a revolutionary mood to interrupt, it is a lot more fragile than that.

    Of course it’s easy as a technical problem. That’s not the point. How do those dozen rednecks meet each other? But let’s assume this away.

    For it to matter from the point of view of a war, the city people have to know who took out their power and why. There has to be somebody or group they can appeal to, to get it back, somebody to negotiate with.

    1. Cut the power
    2. Cities burn, absolute chaos
    3. Rural areas marginally less chaotic, but still basically a total disaster
    4. ???????
    5. Country boys now operate the levers of power

    Fill in the blank

    • Replies: @Awk
    Coronavirus is the wild card.

    Without a vaccine I just can't see the US cities going the way of the Chinese ones, where nearly everyone agrees to abide by lockdowns, mass rebellion and looting does not occur, homeless population does not become a factor, people submit to tests and willingly pay out of pocket (or Medicare?) and people actually follow quarantines. Italy's woes began because an Ethiopian(?) did not give a toss about his quarantine and went to work. And what about cash-strapped Americans, which are at a prime in our cities? I also take into consideration organizational competence in America, which is another X factor. I think we have fallen into third world country tier in that respect. A martial law declaration will probably go up and under those conditions it is a completely new chessboard. I don't see this as a sensationalist prediction.
  155. @roo_ster
    Buckley and Sailer both are stuck in the civic nationalist and ideological rut. The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial, with resettlememt of millions to acheive polities that are more harmonious and governable. If you think such racial and ethnic resettlement undoable, you need to read more history. Post ww2 germans. India, pakistan, bangladesh. Czechia and slovakia. Bosnia, serbia, slovenia, croatia. And so on.

    The usa needs a breakup and reshuffling. And i am not alone in wanting my ethnostate.

    Peaceful beats bloody, but it needs to happen. Greg johnson at https://www.counter-currents.com/ has the most reasonable course of action.

    @Roo.

    The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial

    One can only hope. Trouble is – where do all those millions of white liberals (the real bad kind) go??

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Nirvana already answered that question.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=MEvaQDHw8oA&feature=emb_logo
    , @indocon
    The optimistic scenario, they vanish into the hordes, pessimistic scenario, they produce millions of Brack Obamas in future but carefully nurturing them to get back at heritage whitey.
  156. A moderate solution:

    The U.S. doesn’t have to break up completely, at least not now.
    Let’s start with something more doable: Expel California and
    New York City from the Union. Both have become so alien
    relative to the rest of the country that clearly they no longer
    belong with us. NYC should become an independent city-state
    like Hong Kong used to be. Neither should be allowed to vote
    in the American elections.

  157. @Anonymous
    What difference would it make?

    Corporations would continue to boycott Red America while Republicans would continue to cut their taxes and only do anything if they boycotted Israel. Red America, or at least parts of it, would criminalize abortion, assuring a spike in the crime rates about fifteen years later and gradually turning the South Blacker and Blacker. There'd be a lot of "man up you manchildren" tradcon rhetoric but nothing real to promote family values. No reform in divorce law, certainly.

    We shouldn't treating white Democrats as if they are all irredeemable. If Trump loses in 2016 it won't be because of Silicon Valley soyboys but because the white workers in Michigan and Pennsylvania don't like tax cuts for the wealthy and don't want their daughters to become unwed mothers at 18 because they're shtupping some loser and abortion's no longer available. Those are not unreasonable demands. A real nationalist party could win these voters. The current GOP can't.

    criminalize abortion, assuring a spike in the crime rates about fifteen years later and gradually turning the South Blacker and Blacker

    Steve pretty much debunked the crime angle some time ago.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    He debunked the notion that abortion explained the crime rate decrease which occurred in the 1990s.

    He never claimed to debunk the commonsense notion that if you increase the number of births to groups prone to crime you're going to get an increase in crime, all else being equal. Some tradcons tell us the increase in births won't happen because women who would otherwise have them would suddenly become responsible. This is laughable: if they were responsible they wouldn't be using abortion as a form of contraception in the first place.
  158. Wait, before we have the Breakup don’t we first have to have the Talk? Maybe the Tiff? That’s how it works in a lot of cases. Shouldn’t the US Breakup be modeled after something from a John Hughes movie? Seems appropriate, somehow.

  159. Well, it should. Perhaps not break up, but definitely see a change of borders (anathema to the modern world order!)

    A country needs defendable borders. America doesn’t for the time being – Canada is too weak, and friendly, while Mexico is too incompetent to be a threat. America’s borders are horrifyingly exposed, and especially towards canada, not even real. What does it separate? Both the “american” and “canadian” identities are stupidly weak

    Yet these things can change quickly. If the US explodes, it kicks off a chain reaction. Especially since many areas are split by the border, while geographically they shouldn’t be

  160. Should the United States Break Up?

    It did. Years ago. Quite successfully for the secessionist billionaires.

    For them, “Red” and “Blue” are colors that come with a gaming system.

    For them, we are the game.

    This discussion reminds me why a bitter Canadian Nationalist, years ago, who grumbled “To these guys, “nationalism” is just cartomania. They look at a map like it’s a menu and say, this, not that, but it don’t work that way.”

    It really don’t.

    The divisions of our world are verticle. Seccession is a trap that keeps the victim thinking horizontal. The millionaire/bilionaire class in North America. since at least 1945, are using the caudillo South American system as a model. Total mobility and armored protection for the wealthy, feudalism for everyone else. Eventually even “essential” personel will be locked in to their functions for lack of anywhere else to go. This part really is Global — China meshed into the current industial “West ” because Mao’s legacy was a system compatible with tech feudalism.

    As in Wrath of Khan when, during the starship duel, Spock tells Kirk “He’s bright but inexperienced. His thinking is two-dimensional” and of course space is three.

    The successful seccessionists fly over us all every hour. Probably chuckling over our horizontal thinking in the verticle world where they are, literally, high above us.

  161. Maybe we need two Supreme Courts, the regular one and the one Chuck Schumer wants:

    “…From Louisiana, to Missouri, to Texas, Republican legislatures are waging a war on women, all women, and they’re taking away fundamental rights. I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you, if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

    https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/03/04/schumer-to-kavanaugh-and-gorsuch-you-will-pay-the-price-wont-know-what-hit-you-if-you-make-awful-decisions/

    I don’t recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer.

    The Democrats have weaponized the modern impeachment process, and are eager to use it in all the ways that they can. Impeachment is the constitutional process to get rid of federal judges; it’s been used only once against a Supreme Court justice, in 1805. He was accused of making partisan judgements in lower court rulings. He was acquitted by the Senate.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I don’t recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer."

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.
  162. @Herp McDerp
    Smaller countries are happier ...

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. Smaller countries' citizens are so happy that they're invading us by the millions.

    ... and less corrupt.

    Assumes facts not in evidence! (And if Chicago became its own country, would that magically make it less corrupt?)

    They’re less inclined to throw their weight around militarily ...

    They’re also more inclined to be conquered and exploited when larger countries throw their weight around militarily.

    ...and they’re freer.

    For a while. Eventually a man dressed like Cap'n Crunch takes over.

    Smaller countries also are more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous.

    So are most U.S. states.

  163. @Kratoklastes

    They don’t seem to realize that significant numbers of the police and military will peel off to the deplorable side. They also don’t seem to understand there are an enormous number of former police, military, and civilian enthusiasts with long years of experience and training out there in deplorable land.
     
    Translation: House niggers gon' raaaahz up, put Massah in dey place.

    Cool story, bro.

    Never gonna happen - if government ever tells their goons to turn on the populace, they will do so.

    They pretty much always have - from the Whiskey Rebellion & Shay's Rebellion, to the Bonus Army, to Kent State.

    And that's before considering situations in which the House Niggers could tell themselves that the impending dead weren't real Murkins - Sherman's March to the Sea and devastation of Atlanta and Savannah; the use of air-launched incendiaries during the MOVE standoff in Philly in 1985; Waco; Ruby Ridge.

    Back-shooting Baby-killer coward Lon Horiuchi is a much better example of what to expect.

    If SGHTF* anyone in BDUs should be considered hostile; anyone whose current job involves wearing gaylord SWAT kit should be targeted in their homes (people know where they live); MRAPS should be IEDed or RPGd.

    The House Niggers aren't on our side now: as it stands they are happy caging people for shit that they know is bullshit, and killing people they don't know for reasons they know are bullshit. That's not someone you want on your side, believe me: they will be the first-rank of looters.

    * Shit Genuinely Hits The Fan.

    Standards and practices, multiple uses throughout, this #%&&@ be movin’ all my chairs. Is moderation just delay?

  164. @Anonymous

    The only problem was that the “long run” required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization.
     
    It turns out that isn’t true. That’s what we were taught but historians have always known better. There were definitely a few generations in certain parts where things got bad. But the 1,000 years of darkness is myth. In fact the whole term “dark ages“ was invented in the renaissance to disparage the middle ages.

    A medieval army of 1100 A.D. would’ve destroyed a Roman army of similar size.

    The Romans had an urban culture and a centralized system of administration, resulting in more specialization and many impressive accomplishments in various fields, some of which were not paralleled until after the end of the Middle Ages. Medieval Europe was not so urban — more people lived in rural areas engaged in agriculture. Yet, especially in Northern Europe, that agriculture was more efficient due to various innovations and inventions.

    The result is that, depending on the Malthusian moment, medieval Europeans were either more numerous or better fed than Roman-ruled peoples. It seems to me that Roman urbanization had to have been funded by an agricultural population (much of it enslaved) that lived at a less-than-subsistence level, and the inevitable breakdown of this system was a key component of Rome’s decline.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    It seems to me that Roman urbanization had to have been funded by an agricultural population (much of it enslaved) that lived at a less-than-subsistence level, and the inevitable breakdown of this system was a key component of Rome’s decline.
     
    Some good starter information about the Roman breadbasket here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_ancient_Rome#Farming_practices
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_ancient_Rome#Economics

  165. The objections to secession listed are ultimately what leads Buckley to endorse home rule. But imagine the Supreme Court shoots down the states’ bids to do end runs around the Electoral College and award electors based upon national popular vote. Opportunity for an Article 5 con-con? Would a possible trade-off for a popular vote president be a secession amendment that lays out a process for dealing with air craft carriers, Social Security, and sub-state jurisdictional secession? Unilateral secession is very improbable but reasserting the 10th Amendment right to secession by constitutional amendment might be more pragmatic and feasible.

  166. @Hemid
    Every country bigger than a tour bus should break up.

    Agreed, roughly speaking, and I’ll also put this here since Ron’s posting limits prevent me from quoting it in context:

    Minnesota, which is basically a Soviet miners’ mural with a Somali face painted over Trotsky’s

    That’s pretty good.

  167. @68W58
    O-6 and above maybe more blue than red, O-5 and below way more red than blue.

    The critical ranks are O-5 and O-6, i.e., Lieutenant Colonels, Commanders, Colonels, and Captains. These officers have a high enough level of command to deploy effective combat units yet are close enough to their staff officers and enlisted men to command personal loyalty. I’ve read that when officers at this level become alienated from the governments they serve, the chance that the military will join a revolution or insurrection is greatly increased. The plethora of colonels who assumed control after government overthrows, e.g., Franco, Peron, Nasser, Qaddafi, Noriega, etc., lends some credence to this theory.

  168. @Liza
    @Roo.

    The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial
     
    One can only hope. Trouble is - where do all those millions of white liberals (the real bad kind) go??
    • Replies: @Liza
    I wanna see them burn NOW. With my own eyes.
  169. @ThreeCranes
    "Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you."

    Ah, but there's the rub. They don't care about those closed roads. Pericles' advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open. Landwise, all they needed to do was guard the long walls that connected Athens to her port, Piraeus.

    And just so is the fault line today. All the blue areas are ports with their backs turned towards the clodish interior folks. Their economic policy is one of free trade with their overseas partners whom they reckon as not only more essential but more worthy than their land-bound neighbors.

    This policy failed disastrously when the plague broke out and decimated the population of Athens, but of course, such absurdities as plagues sweeping through populations could never happen today due to our total mastery of the Forces of Nature.

    Interesting analogy but the Greeks were all of the same race, basically, and highly patriarchal.

  170. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    “Should the United States break up? Yes. End of story.”

    No. Period.

    Besides, your buddy Mr. Sailer brought up some salient points (finally). Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn…

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn…
     
    Corvinus, are you ready to die for your cause? Do recall the Algerian model, my friend.

    Death comes for us all. Are you ready to die so that your totalitarian impulses can be realized by someone else? If so, you must account for your choice.

    I am prepared to account for my actions before the Great White Throne. When my hour comes, I will say, "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" But what will you say? That you served Old Scratch, and served him well?

    You are the Mouth of Sauron, a Black Numenorean, the epitome of what the Enemy of Humanity can do with a willing minion.

    Repent of your sins, you viper. There is still time, but only a little.
  171. @Mr McKenna

    most enlisted are “red”
     
    Most white enlisted. Even that's changing, though.

    Do you have any up-to-date info on the demographic makeup of the various SpecOps forces and combat pilots? The latest data I can find is from 2015, and the snakeeaters and frogmen were overwhelmingly pale and male at that time.

  172. Emphatically, yes. But we should be looking for a strategic corporate buyout from the municipal level on up.

  173. @Anon7
    Maybe we need two Supreme Courts, the regular one and the one Chuck Schumer wants:

    "...From Louisiana, to Missouri, to Texas, Republican legislatures are waging a war on women, all women, and they’re taking away fundamental rights. I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you, if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

    https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/03/04/schumer-to-kavanaugh-and-gorsuch-you-will-pay-the-price-wont-know-what-hit-you-if-you-make-awful-decisions/

     

    I don't recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer.

    The Democrats have weaponized the modern impeachment process, and are eager to use it in all the ways that they can. Impeachment is the constitutional process to get rid of federal judges; it's been used only once against a Supreme Court justice, in 1805. He was accused of making partisan judgements in lower court rulings. He was acquitted by the Senate.

    “I don’t recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer.”

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Unless the whistleblower is a Supreme Ct. justice, what you just said is a non-sequitur.
    , @William Badwhite

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.
     
    Trump is not on the Supreme Court. Idiot.
  174. Don’t forget the example of India and Pakistan.

    I suspect they’d have been better off to stay together and work their potential problems out. Now they are enemies and it’s not good.

    I say we stay together.

    • Replies: @indocon
    Are you kidding me? Undivided India would have been like a combination of Nigeria and Afghanistan.
  175. Anonymous[159] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    This is true in the long run, however the big coastal cities are very, very rich. They can afford to withstand such a blockade for a long time by buying and importing supplies from overseas. They will probably capitulate in the end, but it will be by no means a rapid or easy victory.

  176. @teotoon
    Yes! Let us push California out of the Union. Let's give a hearty "welcome!" to the new Chinese colony on the west coast! My what a big new deep water port you have China; and what nice new shiny naval ships do you have; those newly renovated military bases are sooo environmentally friendly! what you say; the former residents of the old California were slaughtered to make room for the millions of new Chinese troops and colonists? No matter, most of them were evil Whites and we can always use the new Mexican refugees: lower wages you know. Besides the Chinese are smarter than those White goyim so we won't miss them; so our imported technology even better than before.

    Can always count on hearing the Adolfite point of view here no matter the context or subject. ‘White goyim” ” evil Whites” oh, brother, what the heck is going on in your head. I just want the climate alarmists, open borders, socialists-for-thee-but-not-me, 400+ genders, anti-religion, anti-traditional family folks to leave the rest of us alone.

    The point of breaking up the USA is to provide people with more options to live in a country that represents them. China is not going to invade California, that’s so dumb it’s not even worth discussing. I’m sure an independent California would be a nuclear power (until they unilaterally disarmed!). California, as an independent country, would have the 5th largest economy in the world.

    If Scotland can consider leaving the United Kingdom, what is so bizarre about California leaving the United States? These ideas should at least be on the table.

  177. @another anon
    There will be no revolution and no civil war in country where 70% of population are overweight or obese.
    Deal with it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

    https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fniallmccarthy%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F10%2F20171013_Obesity_FO.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_LrpzMCMDFI/TmBPIPdUAhI/AAAAAAAAOXA/J43Gt238HIw/s1600/trying%2Bto%2Bget%2Bfat.jpg

    At least she is being true to herself and not grabbing the diet soda.

  178. Awk says: • Website

    Why hasn’t anyone mentioned Texas?

    When it goes the way of north Virginia and gets gun reform, tax reform and the like, the people will protest in the conservative north and either join a state or become a new state. This must happen anyway because otherwise once the Dems have Texas – and California – in their pocket the Republicans can never win again. So it is imperative that Texas splits and splits up the votes. The same will likely happen in Oregon with Greater Idaho. But what all this shifting around actually does is draw the lines for each side to realize if it wants to it can just govern itself.

    https://tinyurl.com/Texas-flip-n-move

  179. Awk says:
    @Not my economy
    Of course it’s easy as a technical problem. That’s not the point. How do those dozen rednecks meet each other? But let’s assume this away.

    For it to matter from the point of view of a war, the city people have to know who took out their power and why. There has to be somebody or group they can appeal to, to get it back, somebody to negotiate with.

    1. Cut the power
    2. Cities burn, absolute chaos
    3. Rural areas marginally less chaotic, but still basically a total disaster
    4. ???????
    5. Country boys now operate the levers of power

    Fill in the blank

    Coronavirus is the wild card.

    Without a vaccine I just can’t see the US cities going the way of the Chinese ones, where nearly everyone agrees to abide by lockdowns, mass rebellion and looting does not occur, homeless population does not become a factor, people submit to tests and willingly pay out of pocket (or Medicare?) and people actually follow quarantines. Italy’s woes began because an Ethiopian(?) did not give a toss about his quarantine and went to work. And what about cash-strapped Americans, which are at a prime in our cities? I also take into consideration organizational competence in America, which is another X factor. I think we have fallen into third world country tier in that respect. A martial law declaration will probably go up and under those conditions it is a completely new chessboard. I don’t see this as a sensationalist prediction.

  180. Anonymous[287] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lurker

    criminalize abortion, assuring a spike in the crime rates about fifteen years later and gradually turning the South Blacker and Blacker
     
    Steve pretty much debunked the crime angle some time ago.

    He debunked the notion that abortion explained the crime rate decrease which occurred in the 1990s.

    He never claimed to debunk the commonsense notion that if you increase the number of births to groups prone to crime you’re going to get an increase in crime, all else being equal. Some tradcons tell us the increase in births won’t happen because women who would otherwise have them would suddenly become responsible. This is laughable: if they were responsible they wouldn’t be using abortion as a form of contraception in the first place.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    I can only say that's not how it looked when I read it.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/abortion-and-crime-so-levitt-was-wrong/
  181. Not sure where my post about Texas went 🤷🏼‍♂️ Frustrating

  182. @notsaying
    Don't forget the example of India and Pakistan.

    I suspect they'd have been better off to stay together and work their potential problems out. Now they are enemies and it's not good.

    I say we stay together.

    Are you kidding me? Undivided India would have been like a combination of Nigeria and Afghanistan.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    Don’t forget about the Balkans.
  183. @Federalist

    And yet, the “most butt-kicking country on Earth” couldn’t pacify a few thousand savages in Afghanistan even after being there for 20 years. Not to mention they couldn’t beat a bunch of peasants with AK-47s in Vietnam.
     
    Yeah, the effectiveness of the U.S. military against a truly hostile American population is vastly overstated. The U.S. military couldn't subdue much smaller and less advanced populations. And unlike in Vietnam and Afghanistan, the military would be based in hostile territory. But for any of that to happen, the population would have to be willing to turn the U.S. into Vietnam or Afghanistan. I can't see people actually giving up lives of comfort and ease to fight the established govt.

    It does not happen overnight but once the train leaves the station, there is no turning back. I grew up in an area that was fairly prosperous but descended into militancy and terrorism over just a couple of years. It all started with real grievances of a large population group with self determination DNA that were not being addressed by the political system, that will be case here in few years.

    A Joe Biden presidency will do more than anyone imagines today to push this country into real racial turmoil as whites are non stop beet up in the media, at work, in their neighborhoods, and in their pocket books.

  184. Steve, your analysis underestimates the role perceived injustice plays in any separation. You list reasons to “keep the marriage together” but you ignore what we have seen.

    The British colonists that became our founding generation would have been better off economically within the British Empire. You see at least the sentiment captured in the 1992 movie “The Last of the Mohicans.”

    George Washington was disrespected during the French and Indian War. Honor motivated his impulse for independence. And Washington was dogged in his determination to defend his honor. Washington did not succeed based on his win/loss record. He won through an unwillingness to give up, even in defeat.

    The Confederates made the same bet, but lost the Civil War. Nevertheless, they won the reconstruction, for almost a century. Then 1964-1965 destroyed the last remnant of the Old South, thanks to LBJ, that paragon of virtue (i.e., that contemptible bastard).

    The American ethos includes an honor component, rarely found the American Establishment, the American Intelligensia, or the American media, but often found in the American working class.

    If Bloomberg had not folded like a cheap card table, he might have been able to realize his gun confiscation program. Then you would see that honor cannot be dismissed with impunity. And, if Bloomberg would have won, God forbid, we would have had a hot and ugly shooting civil war.

    It may still happen. Divorce would be easier.

    • Agree: Hail
  185. @Corvinus
    "I don’t recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer."

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.

    Unless the whistleblower is a Supreme Ct. justice, what you just said is a non-sequitur.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    I get it, but my point is this--doesn't Trump also threaten people? And if Anon7 is so concerned about politicians making a "threat", then why isn't she showing the same level of concern for all members of our government?
  186. @theMann
    So if America were to break up, what exactly would the new countries be? To have a nation, you have to have an identity as a nation - do Yankees or Californians really qualify?


    Then there is question of what the Banksters will fight tooth and nail - whatever you think you are, they know what you are - their milk cows. They will not be happy with any change in the status quo, much less the development of new, probably more stable, currencies.


    Finally, there is this greater reality: Texas is the one State with its own identity and culture, which will gladly go its own way, separated from the degeneracy of Yankee land and the Left Coast. When we leave, we take 75% of "Americas" energy resources with us, and that will trigger a bloody conflict with the assorted thieving filth in Yankee land. At least it is a fight we are prepared to win, and will win, as we are long past tired of association with the Degenerates and Cowards comprising so much of modern "America". And one more telling reality - in a country where Church attendance has collapsed, 75% of Texans go to church every Sunday. We are a Christian nation, what are Americans?

    I admire and respect the real old Texas and yes, it had — and white texans (including many white and intermarried Hispanic Texans) still have the identity you’re talking about.

    But sadly, you and I are aware that decades of mass nonEuropean immigration has overrun that Texas as was intended. If the State of Texas effected secession just, say, ten years from now, it would be a majority-nonwhite, just about majority-MEXICAN Texas. Not the country I’d want to live in, though likely better than what most of California is becoming.

    Then again, just sitting and waiting ensures that the entire USA becomes dystopian California and worse.

  187. @Corvinus
    “Should the United States break up? Yes. End of story."

    No. Period.

    Besides, your buddy Mr. Sailer brought up some salient points (finally). Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn...

    Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn…

    Corvinus, are you ready to die for your cause? Do recall the Algerian model, my friend.

    Death comes for us all. Are you ready to die so that your totalitarian impulses can be realized by someone else? If so, you must account for your choice.

    I am prepared to account for my actions before the Great White Throne. When my hour comes, I will say, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” But what will you say? That you served Old Scratch, and served him well?

    You are the Mouth of Sauron, a Black Numenorean, the epitome of what the Enemy of Humanity can do with a willing minion.

    Repent of your sins, you viper. There is still time, but only a little.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Corvinus, are you ready to die for your cause? Do recall the Algerian model, my friend."

    LOL. I'm not the one touting that we should we break up and will do whatever it takes to make it happen. But, to answer the question, yes, there are many causes that I have fought for and are willing to die for. You?

    "Are you ready to die so that your totalitarian impulses can be realized by someone else?"

    That would be a false characterization on your part, friend.

    "But what will you say? That you served Old Scratch, and served him well?"

    Are you a soothsayer?

    "You are the Mouth of Sauron, a Black Numenorean, the epitome of what the Enemy of Humanity can do with a willing minion."

    Why are you mad, bro?

    Repent of your sins, you viper. There is still time, but only a little.
  188. @Wency
    The Romans had an urban culture and a centralized system of administration, resulting in more specialization and many impressive accomplishments in various fields, some of which were not paralleled until after the end of the Middle Ages. Medieval Europe was not so urban -- more people lived in rural areas engaged in agriculture. Yet, especially in Northern Europe, that agriculture was more efficient due to various innovations and inventions.

    The result is that, depending on the Malthusian moment, medieval Europeans were either more numerous or better fed than Roman-ruled peoples. It seems to me that Roman urbanization had to have been funded by an agricultural population (much of it enslaved) that lived at a less-than-subsistence level, and the inevitable breakdown of this system was a key component of Rome's decline.

    It seems to me that Roman urbanization had to have been funded by an agricultural population (much of it enslaved) that lived at a less-than-subsistence level, and the inevitable breakdown of this system was a key component of Rome’s decline.

    Some good starter information about the Roman breadbasket here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_ancient_Rome#Farming_practices
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_ancient_Rome#Economics

  189. @Not my economy
    Doesn’t work if country people don’t actually have the balls and the organization to shut off the power and food

    Guess it would be rude to mention that the food industry is most responsible for , and most dependent on, illegal alien Hispanic primitive Indians.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    illegal alien Hispanic primitive Indians.

    Are they 'hispanic' or are they 'primitive indians'?
  190. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    The cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco own their own water and power. California has enough food to feed itself. The ranchers and farmers are ultra liberals on the question of immigration. California food, eaten all over America is planted grown, harvested, slaughtered, packed, processed, canned, frozen and driven in trucks by the illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians so beloved by California growers and ranchers.

    The food industry is the biggest importer of illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians. These importers of illegals include the Norman Rockwell farm family fantasies of conservatives.

    • Replies: @indocon
    You're absolutely correct on that, the biggest employers of illegal aliens are agriculture, hospitality, restaurants, construction, what's the common theme in all these sectors… the owners tend to be heavily Republican.
    , @RadicalCenter
    California suffered extended and extensive drought and is not too far from falling back into it. A more severe and eventually unending drought is inevitable if the population here keeps increasing beyond 40 million to 45 and 50 million (which seems likely).

    Then California won’t have the water to grow that food to feed itself, let alone export to anyone else.

    Forget culture, language, race, and all that. Just the mathematical analysis of water consumption by both households and agriculture spells fatal drought for California within the lifetime of many readers here.
  191. @Gabe Ruth
    Yes, this is the step that we need to take, and it's important to think about it and act intelligently. The most important point in Steve's piece read the observation that after the breakup, money will continue to flow towards NYC and SF. The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    Regional level protectionism needs to start before Civil War 2, and if it's done well maybe it could postpone or even cancel it.

    First thing the heartland needs to do is reclaim, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Chicago, Memphis St Louis and other cities from the blacks.

    Second thing is get rid of all the primitive illegal alien Hispanics who do all the work on farms ranches , slaughter houses, packing plants, canneries, freezer plants and drive the trucks that deliver the food to wholesale and retail food markets staffed by illegal alien Hispanics

    If anyone can shut down the American food supply, it’s the illegal alien Indians.

  192. @Jack D

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.
     
    Yes, in the long run Europe prospered even more once it was free of Roman occupation. The only problem was that the "long run" required 1,000+ years to get back to Roman levels of civilization. When it came to things like plumbing and roads, Roman levels were not achieved again until the late 19th century. If getting rid of the "despicable Whites" (each side thinks that the other side's whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I'm not sure the game is worth the candle.

    If getting rid of the “despicable Whites” (each side thinks that the other side’s whites are despicable) will take us 1,000 years to get back to pre-split levels, I’m not sure the game is worth the candle.

    I think that’s a false equivalence. Most Whites are happy to leave silly ass yuppies, hipsters and SJWs alone. But the other side is actively engaged in attacking us with ruinous policies.

    And yeah, I think Carl Sagan was wrong when he implied the “fall of Rome” set us back a thousand years and we’d be living among the stars now etc, etc. Remember, the eastern half never fell, it became the Byzantine empire. Why didn’t they invent warp drives by the year 1400AD?

  193. Anon[304] • Disclaimer says:

    I see no reason why we should allow liberal coastal areas to leave, any more than we allowed the Confederates to leave. If it wasn’t legal for the South to leave, it’s not legal for New England or the West Coast to leave.

    It is, however, perfectly legal (since that was decided 150 years ago), to do a Sherman’s march through their territory to destroy them economically to make them come to heel.

    I’ll repeat it.

    It was legal.

  194. anon[289] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You and many others, today.

    How old are you? If you’re over 50, you have a lot of company. If you are under 25, not so much. Kids born today won’t often feel that way when they are adults.

    That is the long and short of why the implosion of the American empire is both not imminent but quite inevitable.

    No one in 2060 will fight and die for its terminally ill corpse. Something will trigger its dissolution and new governments, plural, will form, some quickly and peaceably and perhaps some with conflict. Worst case scenario, a nuclear weapon or two is used. Probably mostly skirmishes with small arms and a few mortar or howitzer rounds.
    , @MBlanc46
    You’re delusional.
    , @RichardTaylor

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
     
    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn't force your children to be humiliated in "white privilege" exercises?

    Asking for a friend.
    , @Anonymous
    You sound like a defensive battered housewife. Nobody living today and working in government has ever done anything noble in your name, and nobody alive and working in government gives a fig whether you live or die. And if the organism of USA had some kind of AI sentience, it would be even more hostile to you than the individuals who make it work.

    Your government essentially hates you, but parting ways would be "treason." Get a hobby, friend. The unrequited love for a soulless, tax-farming, killing machine is grotesque.
    , @Pincher Martin
    I agree with you, but sadly many Americans no longer do.

    I'm always vexed by people who say we need to detach California, my home state, from the rest of the union. Yes, the kooks are numerous here. Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn't a moron want to give it up without a fight?

    Besides, if you retreat to the interior, they will eventually get to you. Your retreat will not win the war. It merely postpones defeat.
    , @Federalist
    In what way is it your country? Is it anything more than a geographical location with a more or less functional government? The United States of America may be a country but is it still a nation?

    Fighting for one's country at its most fundamental level is defending one's homeland from foreign invasion. Lately for America, fighting for your country means foreign misadventures in service to a government that actively facilitates foreign invasion.

    If secession is treason, so is facilitating an invasion of foreigners and devaluing citizenship.
    , @William Badwhite

    Secession is treason. Period.
     
    Baseless assertion. Go sit in the corner.
  195. How long will White guys in the military feel like they are part of a kick-ass machine when they are treated as its bottom bitches?

    Every part of the culture hates the guts of White men. The prospects of White working and middle class men has never been dimmer. They are routinely humiliated for fun. They are blamed for everything by the clowns at the SPLC and ADL right down to Taylor Swift.

    It’s cuckish to keep up this submissive loyalty to a system that abuses your White children. But so far, Southerners keep cheering it on.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Waiting for a Skrewdriver like band to have an underground hit with “Tied UpTighter Than Taylor Swift’s C..c..c..ontract” ((Scooter Braun Dance Mix)).

    The biggest stutter rock hit since “My Generation”!
  196. @Liza
    @Roo.

    The coming breakup will be ethnic and racial
     
    One can only hope. Trouble is - where do all those millions of white liberals (the real bad kind) go??

    The optimistic scenario, they vanish into the hordes, pessimistic scenario, they produce millions of Brack Obamas in future but carefully nurturing them to get back at heritage whitey.

    • Thanks: Liza
  197. @Alden
    The cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco own their own water and power. California has enough food to feed itself. The ranchers and farmers are ultra liberals on the question of immigration. California food, eaten all over America is planted grown, harvested, slaughtered, packed, processed, canned, frozen and driven in trucks by the illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians so beloved by California growers and ranchers.

    The food industry is the biggest importer of illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians. These importers of illegals include the Norman Rockwell farm family fantasies of conservatives.

    You’re absolutely correct on that, the biggest employers of illegal aliens are agriculture, hospitality, restaurants, construction, what’s the common theme in all these sectors… the owners tend to be heavily Republican.

  198. Anon[304] • Disclaimer says:

    What we need to do is start taxing people on the coasts, an ‘income equality tax,’ and paying the proceeds to Midwesterners. All white, black, and Hispanic people who live in high-paying job areas should be required to pay some of that money to white Midwesterners in the name of income equality.

    One reason why is college costs. Midwesterners never had the big salary increases the coasties did, yet still have to pay the same for colleges. They get socked with debt to pay for education. Therefore, coasties should be required to subsidize the white middle-class in the Midwest. Since a college degree is necessary to earn a middle-class living, this should be a basic right all Midwesterners should have. Midwesterners deserve equal opportunity to get a good education without having to pay off massive debt.

    Transportation is another reason. Midwesterners still have to buy cars to work, yet their salaries have never kept pace with rising car prices.

    Medical costs have gone up for Midwesterners, yet their salaries have never kept pace with the rising costs of medical care.

    An income equality tax that benefits Midwesteners sounds fine to me. After all, all those upper-middle class white coasties LOVE paying welfare benefits to blacks and Hispanics. Let’s make them pay for their poorer white kin. After all, some of those poorer whites literally ARE their kin, unlike the blacks and Hispanics, so they should cough up.

    Let’s make them put their money where their mouths are.

  199. In contrast, Southern secession in 1861 was over slavery,

    If that’s what you think of the past, how is anyone supposed to take your analysis of the future seriously?

  200. Anonymous[307] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    You and many others, today.

    How old are you? If you’re over 50, you have a lot of company. If you are under 25, not so much. Kids born today won’t often feel that way when they are adults.

    That is the long and short of why the implosion of the American empire is both not imminent but quite inevitable.

    No one in 2060 will fight and die for its terminally ill corpse. Something will trigger its dissolution and new governments, plural, will form, some quickly and peaceably and perhaps some with conflict. Worst case scenario, a nuclear weapon or two is used. Probably mostly skirmishes with small arms and a few mortar or howitzer rounds.

    • Replies: @Wency
    Agree fully. American pride is a Boomer opinion, still present albeit weaker among Gen X. The Millennials who retain those beliefs are mostly white non-college-grads who never really paid attention to the narrative and hence operate on Boomer inertia. The power of Boomer inertia is that much weaker among Zoomers.

    Those who absorbed the narrative believe that America is a nation founded by slaveowners, the odious home of racism and capitalist exploitation. Those of us who paid attention to the narrative and explicitly rejected it were left with the conclusion that America is the rainbow-flag-flying capital of Globohomo, an empire and an economy bereft of any other source of cultural cohesion: neither blood, nor beliefs, nor culture, nor even language bind us together. There's no cause for either camp to celebrate, fight, and die for this country.

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien. We insist the Civil War must have been fought to abolish slavery. Boomer Larry David riffed on this in Curb Your Enthusiasm.
  201. Anonymous[307] • Disclaimer says:
    @RichardTaylor
    How long will White guys in the military feel like they are part of a kick-ass machine when they are treated as its bottom bitches?

    Every part of the culture hates the guts of White men. The prospects of White working and middle class men has never been dimmer. They are routinely humiliated for fun. They are blamed for everything by the clowns at the SPLC and ADL right down to Taylor Swift.

    It's cuckish to keep up this submissive loyalty to a system that abuses your White children. But so far, Southerners keep cheering it on.

    Waiting for a Skrewdriver like band to have an underground hit with “Tied UpTighter Than Taylor Swift’s C..c..c..ontract” ((Scooter Braun Dance Mix)).

    The biggest stutter rock hit since “My Generation”!

    • LOL: RichardTaylor
  202. @Anonymous
    He debunked the notion that abortion explained the crime rate decrease which occurred in the 1990s.

    He never claimed to debunk the commonsense notion that if you increase the number of births to groups prone to crime you're going to get an increase in crime, all else being equal. Some tradcons tell us the increase in births won't happen because women who would otherwise have them would suddenly become responsible. This is laughable: if they were responsible they wouldn't be using abortion as a form of contraception in the first place.

    I can only say that’s not how it looked when I read it.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/abortion-and-crime-so-levitt-was-wrong/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Well, if Steve's reading this, he can comment. All I see in that is stuff about the 1990s and not a general theory. Anti-abortion people wanted to take away a general theory from it because they often believe in the just-world fallacy.

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/the-just-world-fallacy-and-immigration-and-abortion/

    The thing about it is that if we could reverse the sexual revolution and ban abortion it wouldn't be a problem. But the Republican Party and the conservative movement are not going to do that. It's going to be more weak sauce of "man up you manchildren." There's this laziness where they want to get their win on abortion and hope that someone else in the future will start fighting the sexual revolution. And in the meantime how many people have to get shot and robbed and raped? You used to hear these stories about the welfare mother with eight kids by seven different men. You hear less and less of them, why? Certainly there's been no decline in promiscuity. It's contraception and abortion.
  203. @Divine Right

    For instance, perhaps the worst cause of the recent unhappiness explosion in the U.S. since the Obama reelection campaign revived identity politics in 2012 is the much-exacerbated war between the sexes. But how would secession solve the problem of men and women getting on each other’s nerves?
     
    Red state women tend to be more conservative than their blue state counterparts; in Alabama, for instance, only around 43-43% of white women supported abortion rights circa 2019, IRRC. Red states additionally aren’t burdened by a media and political class devoted to exacerbating these issues for political and social advancement. Presumably, a newly formed Red nation could regulate this problem out of existence, something that isn’t possible in the current political framework. For instance, many European nations prohibit “hate speech.” I see no reason why a new red nation couldn’t make a list of 10 prohibited utterances and place this into the constitution. Want to claim men are privileged? Hatespeech. Have a problem with man spreading? Hatespeech. Want to presume men are guilty until proved innocent? Hatespeech, possible civil suit, too. Eventually, enough remaining leftists will be prosecuted to set a new, more harmonious, social climate. There are options available to red states in a new red nation that are not available now.

    Similarly, red and blue American states are divided less by race—while California is now only 36.8 percent white, Texas isn’t far behind at just 41.5 percent white—than by white vs. white animus.
     
    True. Trump underperformed among California whites but did extremely well among Alabama whites, the vast majority of whom vote republican. This could be construed as a serious intra-white split, not just a superficial ideological one. Although, it could be claimed Red State and blue state whites are more ideologically similar to each other than they are to most other racial minorities, in some respects at least. This is unfortunately not something blue state whites seem to appreciate.

    However, many Red States are demographically quite different from either Texas or California. In many Red States, the historic black / white dichotomy still applies, and racial tensions there are much different from California. So, the situation is not the same. Unless mass immigration is stopped (even if it is it won’t matter), that will change soon enough and an unacceptable individual -- like Stacy Abrams -- may become governor of one or many Red States, especially in the South. California doesn’t have to worry about that. The demographic situation is not analogous.

    And are Americans most irritated by their fellow Americans whom they encounter in real life, or by those they clash with in cyberspace? And if they divided up into separate geographic countries, would they then cease taunting each other online? I doubt it: The truth is, it’s fun.

     

    I think it's hard to square away the idea that Americans don't hate each other in real life with what I've seen over the last 20 years. Our politics is very much a representation of the current cultural mood. Consider the insanity that was the second democrat primary debate if you want to know how the other side feels about you and your issues:

    ~White Issues

    401k: 0
    American workers/workers: 2 (both mentions by Yang; one was a reference to “workers on both sides”, not just Americans; both are references to trade tariffs hurting individuals and not about job preservation)
    Crime rates: 0
    Disabled/disability: 0 (astonishing considering the number of healthcare mentions)
    Farmer(s): 2 (1 Biden; 1 Butt)
    Federal debt: 1 (Harris)
    Federal deficit: 0
    [negative reference] Free trade/NAFTA/WTO/TPP etc: 0
    Housing: 0 (home prices/affordability, housing, housing prices)
    Industrial Mid-west/heartland/Rustbelt: 1 (Butt.)
    IRA: 0
    Labor, labor movement: 1 (Sanders)
    Manufacturing/manufacturers (job-related, not gun-related): 3 (Balart; Buttigieg; Swalwell)
    Middle-class/working-class/middle-income: 11
    Military family/families: 2 (both mentions by the moderator Rachel Maddow in reference to Buttigieg)
    Military experience: 1 (mentioned by moderator Rachel Maddow about Butt.'s service)
    [negative reference] Military Industrial Complex: 1 (Bernie Sanders)
    Opioid/overdose: 1 (opioid; used once by Biden)
    Retirement: 0
    Rural: 0
    Small town(s): 0
    Social Security: 3 (2 Biden; 1 Gillibrand)
    Suicide/take life: 0
    Tariff(s): 0 (pro tariff mentions by candidate)
    [negative references] Trade war/tariff(s) with China: 5 (4; Yang the Sinophile; against them, position supported by dem donors) + (1; Butt.; against them, position supported by dem donors; Butt. has a history of supporting the donors/wealthy interests)
    Tax cut: 1 (pro, for middle-class; Kamala Harris)
    Troop(s): 4 (all by white male Joe Biden)
    Union(s): 0
    Veteran(s): 3 (one is mentioned in regards to deportation of illegals; one candidate refers to himself as a veteran – Butt.)

    Race/demographics

    African American: 1 (Biden)
    Black: 7 (2 Butt.; 2 Harris; 2 debate moderator Maddow; 1 Swalwell)
    Brown v. Board of Education: 1 (Harris)
    Busing: 7 (2 Biden; 5 Harris)
    Civil rights, Civil Rights Act/activists/movement: 9 (4 Biden; 3 Harris; 1 debate moderator Maddow; 1 Sanders)
    Criminal justice / reform, justice system / reform: 3 (1 Hickenlooper; 1 Maddow; 1 Williamson)
    Discriminate, discrimination: 1 (Harris)
    Diverse, diversity: 14 (non-female related; race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, various fringe groups)
    Ferguson: 2 (Hickenlooper)
    Gerrymandering: 4 (Bennett)
    Integrate: 3 (Harris)
    Martin Luther King, Dr. King: 1 (Biden)
    Police, police accountability, police shooting: 5 (“police” shooting used in terms of race)
    Profiling: 1 (Harris)
    Officer, officer involved shooting: 6 (“officer” used in terms of race; 5 Butt.; 1 debate moderator Rachel Maddow)
    Shooting: 1 (stand-alone term; “shooting” used in terms of race; Hickenlooper)
    Race, racial, racial injustice/equality/inequality, racist: 19
    Reparations: 1 (Williamson)
    Segregate, segregation: 1 (Harris)
    Slave, slavery: 1 (Williamson)
    Voting Rights, Voting Rights Act: 4 (2 Biden; 1 Bennett; 1 Harris)
    White: 0 (in terms of positive group identity)
    [negative reference] white: ... (Butt. deflected blame from an Indianapolis police shooting of a black man before the investigation was completed by pointing out the race of the police officer involved: white.)
    White nationalist / supremacist: 1 (Biden)

    Religion

    Christian/Christianity: 1 (mentioned in the context of condemning family separations of illegal alien border crossers; Butt.)
    Church: 1 (extolled the virtue of “separation of church and state”; Butt.)
    God: 2 (both mentions concerned condemning family separations; Butt.)
    Hindu:0
    Holocaust: 1 (mentioned in the context of comparing family separations of migrants with the Holocaust in Poland through the candidate's family history; Bennett).
    Islam: 0
    Israel: 0
    Jesus: 0
    Jew/Judaism: 0
    Mohamed: 0
    Mosque: 0
    Muslim: 0
    Religion/Religious: 4 (2 mentions extolled the democrat party as standing for any or no religion; 2 mentions condemned the republican party as associating itself with religion and then separating families of illegals; all Butt.)
    Religious Freedom: 1 (mentioned in the context of the candidate's family history / fighting childhood poverty; Bennet)
    Temple: 0
    Synagogue: 0

    Immigration

    *Didn't bother counting, but here is a list of terms, many of which were used.

    Decriminalize, migrant, migrant families, illegal, alien, immigrant, documentation, undocumented immigrant, border, border patrol, wall, fence, security, “better life”, asylum, asylum-seeker, DACA, refugee, deport, deportation, repatriate, repatriation, child, take child from, family separation, separation, DREAM Act, dreamer, …

    *One candidate compared family separations to the Holocaust.

    Women

    Abortion, Abortion rights/services: 5 (1 Gillibrand; 1 Hickenlooper; 2 debate moderator Rachel Maddow; 1 Sanders)
    Contraception: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Diversity: 2 (Sanders; “diversity” explicitly in terms of women; this term was subtracted from the diversity race count)
    ERA: 5 (4 Biden; 1 Harris)
    Family Bill of Rights: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Georgia, other anti-abortion states: 1 (Gillibrand; states that have attempted to restrict abortion)
    Hyde Amendment: 2 (Gillibrand)
    Mother: 5 (1 Butt.; 4 Harris)
    Paid leave: 1 (Gillibrand)
    Pre-K: 2 (1 Biden; 1 Gillibrand)
    Rape: 1 (Harris)
    Roe, Roe v. Wade: 9 (2 Gillibrand; 5 debate moderator Rachel Maddow; 2 Sanders)
    Sexual abuse/assault: 1 (Harris)
    Women: 8 (“women” used as a positive group identity OR specifically pandered to as an identity group; 6 Gillibrand; 2 Sanders)
    Women's movement: 1 (Sanders)
    Women's reproductive freedom / health / rights: 6 (4 Gillibrand; 2 Hickenlooper)
    Woman's right to choose, right to control her body: 3 (Sanders)
     
    As a separate entity, Red States would be empowered to regulate their own cultural mood just as many other countries already do. Germany, for example, heavily censors the American internet. There are many conservative YouTubers whose content is banned in that country. I see no reason why a newly formed Red nation couldn’t similarly block Salon, the Washington Post, Newsweek, and these horrible late night ideologues. Further, such states might conceivably contract with Chinese companies to fund and run their own alternative internet structure, including websites. China has some very good tech companies easily the match of Google.

    Similarly, is the threat of online censorship worse from the U.S. government or from woke multinational corporations?
     
    What’s the difference? If the GOP refuses to regulate them, they might as well be an arm of the government considering employees have nearly identical views as many government bureaucrats. And as The American Conservative has pointed out, there is a revolving door between government employees and Silicon Valley anyway.

    Further example from cable news: https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/23/cnn-msnbc-15-spooks-mccabe/

    Here’s one worrying trend: looming tech industry unionization by SJW employees. Question: what happens when the far left unionizes Google, Facebook, and Twitter and then demands their political enemies get deplatformed? Well, it's already happened at Kickstarter.

    SJW joins Kickstarter.

    Former DC Editor Joins KICKSTARTER as Comics Outreach Lead

    "I am stoked to raise up the comics community, especially marginalized creators. As a queer woman of color, it’s a very personal mission of mine to highlight LGBTQIA and PoC comics writers and artists," Zhang said in a Kickstarter Q&A announcing her hiring."

    https://www.newsarama.com/39996-kickstarter-hires-new-comics-outreach-lead.html
     
    SJW Kickstarter bans normie who advocated an end to woke comic books when he tried to make his own. Excuse given: racism / marginalized groups, yada yada yada. Reality: he spoke out against them.

    DC Comics Artist Richard Pace Posts Diversity & Comics’ KickStarter Appeal Claiming He is a Liar!

    https://boundingintocomics.com/2018/10/01/dc-comics-artist-richard-pace-posts-diversity-comics-kickstarter-appeal-claiming-he-is-a-liar/
     
    SJWs promote "Always Punch Nazis" comic book, which they claim is "satire". Management disagrees and terminates the project. SJWs lead putsch unionization effort in response to seize company editorial control.

    https://slate.com/technology/9/09/kickstarter-turmoil-union-drive-historic-tech-industry.html
     
    SJWs successfully unionize Kickstarter after SJW boycott.

    Comics Creators: Kickstarter Union Puts ACTIVISM Over PROFITS?

    Comics book creators take note: Kickstarter employees have voted to unionize, but it's not simply because of better working conditions. Thanks to a controversial comic book funding campaign, Kickstarter employees now want the ability to help dictate the kinds of projects the company allows to be funded on the platform and they've said as much. … This is important when understanding what is going on with comic book crowdfunding today, and why some campaigns -- like "Jawbreakers" -- were cancelled with little or no explanation.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1q9UBgnxek
     
    There are many other examples of censorship I could give, such as former Vox employee Carlos Maza's attempt to pressure YouTube into banning his critics. The Daily Caller has about 6 or 7 scary articles about Google employees contemplating rigging search results to hurt Donald Trump or derank news outlets they don’t like. And, of course, the establishment media is perennially running scare articles on "conspiracy theories" to pressure YouTube into censoring government critics. Do I need to provide a list of YouTubers already banned? This isn’t trivial, either. Social media is now probably more influential than cable news.

    Mozilla wants to hear your tales of YouTube radicalization so unwanted videos get censored

    https://www.rt.com/news/468789-mozilla-youtube-regret-radicalization/
     

    New York Times Alleges Conspiracy After Backing Boycotts of Conservative Media

    https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/08/26/hypocrisy-new-york-times-alleges-conspiracy-after-backing-boycotts-of-conservative-media/
     
    WaPo: America Needs Hatespeech Laws.

    “When I was a journalist, I loved Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s assertion that the Constitution and the First Amendment are not just about protecting “free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.” … I think it’s time to consider these statutes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/29/why-america-needs-hate-speech-law/
     
    Tell me how this doesn't get worse. Eventually, they'll get their way through sheer entropy if nothing else. You'll then wish you had regulated those companies back when you had the chance. Shame on all those gatekeeping GOP outlets that took Google bribe money and did nothing. As separate countries with separate legal paradigms, Red States would be better positioned to prevent this kind of thing. The current system seems unworkable.

    If America split up, wouldn’t money continue to pour into New York and San Francisco? But then the hinterlanders couldn’t even elect a Trump as revenge upon the coastal elites.
     
    States like West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Arizona are pretty crucial to states like California. I don’t see how Red States can’t just extract additional funds through something akin to price gouging. Want water? Pay me. Want heating oil? Pay me. Want coal? Double or nothing. Red states aren’t without their means of revenge should they decide to go down that road. Further, states like California heavily depend upon emigration. As a separate country, I’d bet on California being somewhat less attractive as a destination, despite the good weather; even now California isn’t a good destination for middle-class whites as huge numbers are fleeing the state. Over time, most of its tech industry would also probably migrate to China. That’d be revenge enough for Red States, not that “revenge” is really what they want anyway – something I think the ruling class forgets or misunderstands. Most red state types would tolerate blue states and their politics if they weren’t under such assault demographically and culturally.

    Lastly, I don’t see how a smart Red State leader couldn’t just enact his own revenge on coastal elites through political interference. The president of Redstan might secretly fund racial identity groups, mass immigration groups and others with the purpose of sowing dissent. Maybe he gets an initiative on a ballot somewhere calling for Zimbabwe-style land appropriations from ritzy white blue areas by poor minorities who’ll be a significant force in some bluestan combinations.

    And then there are the practical questions of how to divide up a huge country, ones that Buckley skims over.
     
    These are difficult but not insurmountable problems. Presumably, this could be addressed at a constitutional convention. First, a few proposals would be floated, and then experts would address the pros and cons of each. The important thing isn’t to solve every issue in advance but to acknowledge the problem in the first place. Solutions will then follow.

    For example, where, exactly, do you draw the border? Buckley’s book only features one map, showing the Republican-Democrat divide in the 2016 election at the county level. But it’s hard to imagine how to draw new national boundaries that would divide leftist urban centers from their own rightist exurbs.
     
    It is not necessary to remove all red areas from blue or blue from red. Partition could happen along a periphery county or state level. The matter is up for negotiation. The point is merely to preserve majority red voting power within large georaphic areas currently identified as Red. After, Red States would be empowered through a new constitution to deplatform and slowly remove the most toxic blue elements (Antifa, ADL, SPLC, BLM, SJWs, feminists). Many extreme leftists would voluntarily leave as the government cracks down on their comforts and political expression, a solution vaguely similar to your own self-deportation solution to illegal immigration from years back, if I recall.

    Ex: Red States could ban things SJW whites like (feminism) or promote things they hate (traditional culture) and they would then slowly leave over time as a result, perhaps faster if given an economic incentive. Over time, those interior urban blue areas would become purple again. The situation will slowly fix itself. This option could be part of a deal made between reds and blues: red states get reds to replace blues and vice versa. Of course, it’s not that easy, but population transfers can work over a period of say 20 years with economic incentives. It could even be voluntary.

    Dividing along partisan lines of geography would create an extremely complicated map with national borders typically drawn a few dozen miles outside of civic centers,
     
    Not necessarily. You don’t have to partition every city and country. Red will get some blue and blue will get some red. A compromise between parties can be reached through negotiation. In any case, this could still work with just a few, or even a single, red state leaving the union. That seems easy enough to contemplate. Many of these states are the size of some European countries.

    Moreover, whites tend to become Democrats or Republicans depending upon whether they live in cities or the countryside.
     
    Does it matter? What stops a strong Red State central government from lording it over bluer metropolitan areas? Further, and this is indeed an interesting point: future (perhaps even present) advancements in DNA testing might allow Red States to selectively emigrate some number of whites whose conservatism is genetically influenced; about half of political persuasion is hereditary. Say a single red state, Alabama, seceded. That state has a land area approximately 30% greater than South Korea but only around a tenth of the population. There’s lots of room there to grow. Importing just a small fraction of outside Red State / Trump voters and independents based on a combination of genetic and psychological testing could produce a population essentially immune to liberalism, regardless of residence. I don’t see why this couldn't be an option.

    Israel is a fairly small place, but the point is that Jews have a homeland where they are free to express themselves and not be dominated by foreign racists. The psychological stress of living in the United States as it is now is almost overwhelming, and it’s not just social media. Conservatives need just a single state to make this work.

    And then there’s the question of what to do with American military assets
     
    Sell most of it, keep some of it, rely on non-convention deterrence for the rest. Anyway, this is a comparatively smaller issue that could be negotiated at a constitutional convention. It ranks far below other issues. I don’t think Tennessee is going to war with Minnesota over an aircraft carrier.

    In truth, however, the likely answer to the question of “Who would be willing to fight?” is the military servicemen who signed up to fight for the USA.
     
    There are other ways besides fighting. The constitutional convention solution would legitimize a peaceful breakup without war. The various parts of the Soviet Union didn’t resort to large-scale warfare as it disintegrated. And as others have pointed out, Red States could simply secede on their own through state legislatures, and then dare the Union to attack after purging their police and national guards. My bet is that blue state types aren’t going to risk a disruption of their flow of creature comforts to fight Arkansas. They’ll be acrimony at first, and then they’ll get used to the idea.

    And as you pointed out, “who would be willing to fight?” Red states are as large as some European countries. Does this empire really have the manpower – white male – to conquer and hold those areas against even moderate determination for long without also losing face globally and maybe even being kicked out of Japan and South Korea once pictures of the airforce bombing civilians in Tuscaloosa comes out? Yes, they could send in Hispanic and black reservists, but the British made a similar mistake during the Revolutionary War by promising black slaves freedom; it turned former loyalist whites against them and turned the conflict racial.

    So, secession is not going to happen.
     
    We’ll see soon enough once Texas and Georgia flip blue and democrats send in the National Guard to arrest and jail gun owners. Think this is impossible? Beto O’rouke’s debate statement begs to differ. And then there's the recent actions of newly-elected democrats in Virginia. I wouldn’t count out secession if current negative trends hold constant, and there are many of them. Maybe also something unexpected happens like Adam Schiff provoking a conflict with Russia and getting a lot of white Red State gentiles killed, provoking a retaliation against his home state.

    Or course, it's always possible the red state conservative stereotype of "sit back and grill" turns out true. In that case, the Union has nothing to worry about unless the supply of beef and pork runs low.

    I think Steve’s objections here can best be summed up with the following quote from The Z-Blog:

    Those old enough to remember that time and what it was like to feel genuine love of country, should be forgiven for not wanting to close the door on it. … Old people should not be so quick to condemn the young people for mocking Baby Boomers or criticizing civic nationalism. At the root of that mockery is a bitterness at knowing they can never experience what their ancestors experienced. … Your past is now alien to you.
     

    Less talk, more manspreading.

  204. @Divine Right
    Partition may become a question the general public gives serious attention to after Joe Biden's 2020 election victory over Donald Trump, assuming Sanders isn't the nominee. Although, I can't say how many will go this way. My guess is that partition may become fairly serious late into the 2020s when the shock of Texas (?), Georgia, North Carolina, and Florida -- or some combination of those states -- going permanently blue settles in. Such a possibility was briefly raised just after Mitt Romney lost the presidential election in 2012. Fox News had fooled a lot of people into thinking Mitt was going to win.

    I knew an old boomer public transportation bus driver in a diverse American city at the time. Early in the morning, he was ecstatic -- eagerly greeted everyone who entered. He was the kind of guy who, perhaps in a rivalry with the majority black drivers who often blasted black political commentary channels to passengers, audibly listened to Rush Limbaugh during his route. Well, he wasn't so happy the next morning. He didn't say a word to anyone. Boomers probably thought to themselves, "How could Mitt Romney not win? He did everything Reagan did -- said all the right things, paid lip service to all the right groups: God, small business, freedom, defense, democrats are the real racists." Well, times change. I'm seeing much of the same phenomenon now. A lot of people wrongly think there is going to be some kind of Trumpslide: economy, freedom, Israel, lowest black unemployment, democrats are the real transphobes. I wouldn't count on it unless Biden's medical records are leaked and they reveal a dementia diagnosis.

    Biden, despite being obviously senile, or in the early stages, will almost certainly win; last night, another embarrassing gaffe: confused his wife for his daughter and had to be immediately corrected on stage. The demographics for a Reagan-style GOP landslide aren't there anymore (macabre observation: even moreso if this coronavirus sweeps through the elderly population with a mortality greater than 1%). Additionally, Trump will have discredited himself and the democratic process by ignoring the wishes of his 2016 base and running (and losing) as a milquetoast conservative beholden to corporate donors. It will be clear that no matter who the republicans nominate and vote for, nothing will change. Even if they win, they lose -- and they'll very soon not even get the fig leaf of "winning."

    I've always believed Biden would be the more dangerous of the two candidates between himself and Sanders. The latter would push for a few economic policies that might peel off 2 - 3 % of Trump's white vote, legitimizing his election and calming things down. The former will do nothing much while occasionally engaging in hateful social policy and rhetoric in an attempt to divert democratic party voters from noticing how wealthy the leadership is. That doesn't bode well for reconciliation efforts. Despite this, the ruling class has apparently gone with the guy who'll most preserve their pocketbooks in the short term. In doing so, the mask has slipped and revealed an insular, greedy establishment first concerned with their own interests ahead and beyond any kind of greater national concern. At least it's out in the open now, for what it's worth.

    You’re probably correct about a Biden victory. Vote stealing alone will probably be enough to over-turn 2016. I doubt that a push for secession will be an immediate result.

  205. @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    You’re delusional.

  206. You breakup a country solely when there are two distinct nations in one.

    Ideological differences are passing fancies. I could point out some interesting things I’ve learned reading the history of cinema. The reason why Hollywood is where it is at for example is informative of how very different San Francisco was back in the 1910’s. It would have been located in SF, but that city was way too conservative for “Hollywood morals”.

    One aspect I will always remember is how honor killing was a thing back then. Of course, it is not the Muslim variant, but it was practiced thus. A father would go and kill a boy who impregnated their daughter without marrying her. The law would turn a blind eye on this apparently, so can you imagine how morally rigid this society was at the time?

    So, as you see, San Francisco changed dramatically overtime. It was overly conservative until it became what you now know since the 1960’s.

    Anyway, I don’t think you can be considered a nationalist if you go around saying: I’m a nationalist for a nation that do not exist, that I would like to create to match my preferences. Nah, you got to accept NYC and SF and LA and Chicago as part of the whole. To the rest of the world, this is what the US is anyway, those are the cities they think about as being America. If you’d make a country from the rest, it would be an insignificant powerless nation with zero influence that control none of the media or the major industries. Good luck with those farms I guess.

  207. @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.

    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn’t force your children to be humiliated in “white privilege” exercises?

    Asking for a friend.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin

    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn’t force your children to be humiliated in “white privilege” exercises?
     
    Well, if you yourself can't name any states which value the freedoms you treasure, then where do you plan to retreat to during the great breakup?
    , @Corvinus
    "Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person?"

    All 50 states.
  208. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.

    Is the United States going to break up?

    No.

    End of story.

    Why waste time on ludicrously silly and impractical fantasies? Even if those who own and control the country were willing to allow such a thing (and they most certainly will not allow it) there is no way it could be done.

    Explain to me how you think it could be done.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    Perhaps a more plausible scenario is the polity of the USA decaying -- evolving? -- into a much looser conglomeration of semi-autonomous entities, perhaps a bit like the Holy Roman Empire, and indeed many empires down through the ages.

    We're already seeing US states and cities declaring themselves exempt from certain ostensibly national laws and policies, e.g. sanctuary cities, Second Amendment zones, etc. .
    , @Anon87
    Maybe not a violent schism, but just a slow dissolve into a United-States-in-name-only.
  209. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lurker
    I can only say that's not how it looked when I read it.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/abortion-and-crime-so-levitt-was-wrong/

    Well, if Steve’s reading this, he can comment. All I see in that is stuff about the 1990s and not a general theory. Anti-abortion people wanted to take away a general theory from it because they often believe in the just-world fallacy.

    https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/the-just-world-fallacy-and-immigration-and-abortion/

    The thing about it is that if we could reverse the sexual revolution and ban abortion it wouldn’t be a problem. But the Republican Party and the conservative movement are not going to do that. It’s going to be more weak sauce of “man up you manchildren.” There’s this laziness where they want to get their win on abortion and hope that someone else in the future will start fighting the sexual revolution. And in the meantime how many people have to get shot and robbed and raped? You used to hear these stories about the welfare mother with eight kids by seven different men. You hear less and less of them, why? Certainly there’s been no decline in promiscuity. It’s contraception and abortion.

  210. Anonymous[277] • Disclaimer says:

    This is dumb. I only wish that the giant squid known as the U.S.A. would let some of us peacefully vote our way out of its clutches. Never gonna happen. It would only happen after a Russia style collapse. The banks decide it’s time to implode the dollar, wont lend anymore money, congress passes laws to print their own dollars, but they are worthless, and no one will take them… a few years later… poorer states have had massive riots due to lack of money for food, schools, etc., they start talking to banks via back channels to finance them if they leave. Banks say yes, then the state secedes, but probably not without some skirmishes in the vein of current European resistance.

  211. Anonymous[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    You sound like a defensive battered housewife. Nobody living today and working in government has ever done anything noble in your name, and nobody alive and working in government gives a fig whether you live or die. And if the organism of USA had some kind of AI sentience, it would be even more hostile to you than the individuals who make it work.

    Your government essentially hates you, but parting ways would be “treason.” Get a hobby, friend. The unrequited love for a soulless, tax-farming, killing machine is grotesque.

    • Agree: Hail
  212. The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd. They’ve lost the Culture War. They’ve lost the Demographic War. They’ve lost the political war. So now they’re taking refuge in a fantasy alternative universe in which everything can be magically fixed. All you have to do is say the word Secession three times and hey presto, secession will happen. And they’ll live happily ever after in a white ethnostate from which Democrats and liberals and non-whites will be excluded (again, by magical means).

    It’s the sort of thinking you get in crazy religious cults.

    • Troll: SOL
    • Replies: @Dissident

    The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd.
     
    "Alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist" is an extremely broad category that includes within it many distinctly different, conflicting, irreconcilable, and even mutually exclusive ideas and entities. What you wrote is no doubt true for many of the entities that would fall under one or more of the named labels but certainly not for all.

    To the extent that there is any single designation that my own views could be said to align with more than any other, it would seem to be dissident Right. I have considerable respect for individuals such as our host Mr. Sailer, John Derbyshire, Kevin Michael Grace and Paul Gottfried. And I find considerable (though certainly not complete) convergence between their respective views and my own. (Note that at least three of those four have explicitly rejected White Nationalism. Derbyshire at the very least does not seem to embrace it.)

    I have little-to-no use, however, for most of the remaining individuals identified as alt-right and certainly White Nationalist with whom I am familiar. And, obviously, the mere fact that I am a Jew alone already guarantees that for many of them, the feeling is mutual.

    For someone such as Nick Fuentes and his Groypers, there is a tragic irony in how much I find myself in agreement and sympathy with so much of what they represent.

  213. @Gabe Ruth
    Yes, this is the step that we need to take, and it's important to think about it and act intelligently. The most important point in Steve's piece read the observation that after the breakup, money will continue to flow towards NYC and SF. The heartland needs to start thinking about how to avoid capital flight (actually, how to start accumulating capital), both economic and human. In an acrimonious breakup, I could imagine human capital would be the easier of the two.

    Regional level protectionism needs to start before Civil War 2, and if it's done well maybe it could postpone or even cancel it.

    Much is made of California produce, but for Blue America’s beloved “avocado toast”, you need both avocados and toast. Where is their wheat going to come from?
    Red America still has all the commodity farming (wheat, corn, soy) farmland that drives the US economy.

    One thing that’s overlooked is that without Redmerica, the “identity tensions” that are currently driving the Red/Blue split would still exist in Blumerica, but largely disappear in Redmerica. Steve says they would re-appear in future generations, but in the short term, it would get much better in one and much worse in the other. Blumerican society is much more on the precipice of chaos than Redmerican. Imagine all the homeless and the minority ghetto dwellers in the event of social disruption.

    Nevertheless, I agree with Steve that the military would be on the side of union. Unlike the last civil war, when Redmerica essentially had the best of the officer corps, it now essentially has enlisted (retired). With control of the command and communication structures and infrastructure of the military, pro-union forces would maintain control. And I’m sure that the eventuality Steve references has been modeled and planned for inside current DOD.

  214. @dfordoom

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.
     
    Is the United States going to break up?

    No.

    End of story.

    Why waste time on ludicrously silly and impractical fantasies? Even if those who own and control the country were willing to allow such a thing (and they most certainly will not allow it) there is no way it could be done.

    Explain to me how you think it could be done.

    Perhaps a more plausible scenario is the polity of the USA decaying — evolving? — into a much looser conglomeration of semi-autonomous entities, perhaps a bit like the Holy Roman Empire, and indeed many empires down through the ages.

    We’re already seeing US states and cities declaring themselves exempt from certain ostensibly national laws and policies, e.g. sanctuary cities, Second Amendment zones, etc. .

  215. @Anonymous
    One thing is clear: there could be no fight between red and blue because blue America would lack the means to resist.

    5 million people in the bay area or los angeles can't do anything but die when country people shut off their power, water, food supply, roads, etc.

    Cramming people into cities is an artificial way of living that assumes the country folk will keep the machine running for their masters.

    In a war the liberals would surrender before a single shot would have to be fired because they'd have no choice. San Francisco is not real. It doesn't support itself.

    And I picked California because it is the bluest state. Even there theyd capitulate immediately to Republican minority who live where the water, food and power comes from.

    Urban dwellers are just impotent parasites in a conflict. Their way of live depends on the people they think of as their inferiors choosing to put up with their condescension.

    Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you.

    Rural food production didn’t do much to help against urban communists in Russia or anywhere else. Being tied to a patch of land is a weakness, not a strength. Farmers have always been under an overclass one way or another, from serfdom to tenancy, and the relative freedom of farmers in America is a legacy of colonization that made it actually advantageous for the elite to hand out patches of land.

    It would be risky for the rurals to push for independence precisely because the cities need the food and water. The urban elite would need to respond and they would no longer be restrained by political legacy, the constitution and all that. If there’s a war and the urbans win, the rural rebels are not going to own that farm, mine or spring anymore – if they’re still allowed to work there it will be as a serf, a tenant or a worker in a collectivized combinate.

    The fact that serfs produced the food with their labor never gave them any leverage over the lords. The peasants would of course curse having to serve condescending parasites who do no physical labor but trying to starve the lords never worked out for anyone. This transactional society where political elites actually purchase their food and water from people who own farms or water sources is a historical aberration and if the people who own the farms push their luck they may just lose them.

    There’s no future for white people unless they can take back the power centers. Withdrawing to rural life is just preparing your descendants for serfdom.

  216. @Dumbo
    Another thing: Italy and Germany for a long time were not nation-states, but a collection of different kingdoms. United by language, religion and geographical proximity, but not unified nations as we understand them today. In fact, I think that the concept of nation-state in the form of large multicultural democratic republics might have been an anomaly and it is on the wane, replaced perhaps by the historically more common city-state. New York is a nation of its own, very different from the rest of the U.S., like, say, Venice once was.

    Another thing: Italy and Germany for a long time were not nation-states, but a collection of different kingdoms. United by language, religion and geographical proximity, but not unified nations as we understand them today.

    The United Kingdom is an artificial nation as well. It’s much more likely to break up than the US. The only thing uniting the UK was that Scotland, Wales and Ireland were unlucky enough to have England as a neighbour.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  217. @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    I agree with you, but sadly many Americans no longer do.

    I’m always vexed by people who say we need to detach California, my home state, from the rest of the union. Yes, the kooks are numerous here. Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn’t a moron want to give it up without a fight?

    Besides, if you retreat to the interior, they will eventually get to you. Your retreat will not win the war. It merely postpones defeat.

    • Replies: @education realist
    The thing is, as Teotoons mentions above, that there's no way California could leave. The US would never let it. It would certainly be bad for Dem control if we pretend it ever happens.

    First, 45% of whites in CA voted for Trump. I very sincerely doubt they would stay in CA in the event that the state left the union. I suspect a huge chunk of white Dems--federal workers, for starters--would stay, either. But let's assume they all state.

    White CA Republcians all go north to Washington or Oregon, or perhaps to Arizona, maybe Texas. Either turn two blue states back red or strengthen red states more.

    Blacks would, with any sense, get the hell out of Dodge, because with 45% of whites gone, the state's Hispanics and Asians could give a shit about blacks. Not many blacks left anyway, but they'd all leave.

    So progressive whites, a much smaller group, would no longer be dominant. Right now, they are dominant because they get the Hispanic and Asian vote and give them political representation without giving up power because they're the strongest overall faction in a blue state. But once it's just them versus Hispanics and Asians (mostly Chinese), progressive whites will have far less power and Hispanics and Chinese aren't progressive at all.

    Meanwhile, Mexico and China start sending over nationals in huge numbers to a "country" who pretends to value open borders, and come on. Who's winning that battle?

    So pretty soon, California is an outpost of China. All that farmland, all that real estate, all that intellectual property.

    Ain't happening. It's amazing how many people can delude themselves, whether it be the "We hate the US and should leave!" or the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" faction. As if the US would a) give up a huge chunk of its agricultural land and b) give China a foothold in the continent.

    I agree with Pincher that the comments here are idiotic in their ignorance of CA's geopolitical and economic value to US, but of the 100 or so comments I read, the ignorance of basic reality was even greater.
    , @Federalist

    Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn’t a moron want to give it up without a fight?
     
    The wealth and beauty are certainly true but having been overrun by immigrants, haven't we already given up California? Lacking a functional nation, is there any "we" to "give up" California?
  218. @RichardTaylor

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
     
    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn't force your children to be humiliated in "white privilege" exercises?

    Asking for a friend.

    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn’t force your children to be humiliated in “white privilege” exercises?

    Well, if you yourself can’t name any states which value the freedoms you treasure, then where do you plan to retreat to during the great breakup?

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    I doubt there will be any break up anytime soon. Now, in a few generations it may be inevitable as the mass of 3rd worlders keeps pouring in. A real country is made up of its people, it's not just based on a piece of paper.

    I just don't want young White men to feel obligated to defend a country that hates their guts.
  219. @Alden
    Guess it would be rude to mention that the food industry is most responsible for , and most dependent on, illegal alien Hispanic primitive Indians.

    illegal alien Hispanic primitive Indians.

    Are they ‘hispanic’ or are they ‘primitive indians’?

  220. @Pincher Martin

    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn’t force your children to be humiliated in “white privilege” exercises?
     
    Well, if you yourself can't name any states which value the freedoms you treasure, then where do you plan to retreat to during the great breakup?

    I doubt there will be any break up anytime soon. Now, in a few generations it may be inevitable as the mass of 3rd worlders keeps pouring in. A real country is made up of its people, it’s not just based on a piece of paper.

    I just don’t want young White men to feel obligated to defend a country that hates their guts.

  221. @ThreeCranes
    "Otherwise, good luck in the bay when the power goes out and the roads out are closed to you."

    Ah, but there's the rub. They don't care about those closed roads. Pericles' advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open. Landwise, all they needed to do was guard the long walls that connected Athens to her port, Piraeus.

    And just so is the fault line today. All the blue areas are ports with their backs turned towards the clodish interior folks. Their economic policy is one of free trade with their overseas partners whom they reckon as not only more essential but more worthy than their land-bound neighbors.

    This policy failed disastrously when the plague broke out and decimated the population of Athens, but of course, such absurdities as plagues sweeping through populations could never happen today due to our total mastery of the Forces of Nature.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. They don’t care about those closed roads. Pericles’ advice to Athens in the Peloponnesian War was to divorce themselves from their land holdings and rely instead upon their indomitable navy to ensure the survival of the city by keeping the sea lanes open.

    That’s great for everything not made in America, but the food’s grown here.

    China’s getting locust plagues now too, BTW…

  222. @james wilson
    That's what they said in 1861, and they were right. Yankees had other ideas, still do.

    Yankees had other ideas, still do.

    Elite Yankees, and they can’t count on LumpenYankees to show up this time.

    Quite to the contrary, I might add…

  223. @Anon7
    Democrats try to pretend that it is about 1850, and PoC minorities and women ("black bodies", "our bodies, ourselves") are in horrific actual bondage to white male masters.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help ("right to bear arms") and doctors don't know anything anyway ("no, I don't want to pay for national health care").

    I found myself thinking about this more than a decade ago, when I noticed that the Republican and Democrat parties seemed to be in a branding and advertising war.

    In branding and advertising, you choose a mental/emotional division, on one side there are your customers and on the other, people who aren't likely to buy your product anyway.

    What is the most emotional division our country went through? The Civil war. So, that's how we brand in political fights.

    No, I don't think a break-up is in the cards, mostly because the Left wants that power! All of it. Besides, would you divvy up the national debt? Divvy up the nukes? That would be great, California governors with their own nuclear weapons.

    and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help (“right to bear arms”)

    The 2A was never about self-defense from criminals, you commie. Go fuck yourself.

  224. @Kratoklastes
    Organising collective security in the absence of a parasitic government has been a solved problem for over 1000 years. It was already solved when Molinari wrote "The Production of Security" in 1849.

    The túath system in Ireland - a system of voluntary association, private law, and no taxation - managed to defend itself from invasion by England for 600 years. The Icelandic Commonwealth[1] - very specifically a voluntary panarchy - lasted for longer than the US has lasted to date.

    And of course there's the Pashtun, who have just beaten the 4th Empire who tried to take their (rather meagre) shit. In their natural state, the jirga system does fuck-all interference in the average citizen's lives - but if someone turns up uninvited the Pashtun sort that shit out.

    Folks who get a damp patch in their knickers over putative martial prowess of standing militaries, fail to understand that despite their "might" they are the underdog in 4G war. Arreguín-Toft's "How the Weak Win Wars" [2] is ~20 pages, and ought to be mandatory reading (before people go further and flesh it out with, say, John Robb and William S Lind).

    Damp-patch dead-enders always fall for some version of the 'stab in the back' theory: "If we had gone all out, we would have won", ignoring that the prize would have been ruined in the process. The French call it jusquauboutism - the Frogs have a shitty grasp of sunk cost, yet even they have a pejorative for dead-enderism.


    [1] People who take an interest in this stuff also refer to it as the Icelandic Free State, which is a better fit with the etymology of the Icelandic þjóðveldið - þjóð: people (also land, nation); veldið: regime (cognate of veldi: power) although auto-translate renders þjóðveldi as 'Commonwealth' nowadays.

    [2] Arreguín-Toft, I (2001) How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict" International Security, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Summer 2001), pp. 93–128

    Imagine thinking that the issue of national defense was solved 50 years before the airplane was invented.

  225. @Pincher Martin
    I agree with you, but sadly many Americans no longer do.

    I'm always vexed by people who say we need to detach California, my home state, from the rest of the union. Yes, the kooks are numerous here. Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn't a moron want to give it up without a fight?

    Besides, if you retreat to the interior, they will eventually get to you. Your retreat will not win the war. It merely postpones defeat.

    The thing is, as Teotoons mentions above, that there’s no way California could leave. The US would never let it. It would certainly be bad for Dem control if we pretend it ever happens.

    First, 45% of whites in CA voted for Trump. I very sincerely doubt they would stay in CA in the event that the state left the union. I suspect a huge chunk of white Dems–federal workers, for starters–would stay, either. But let’s assume they all state.

    White CA Republcians all go north to Washington or Oregon, or perhaps to Arizona, maybe Texas. Either turn two blue states back red or strengthen red states more.

    Blacks would, with any sense, get the hell out of Dodge, because with 45% of whites gone, the state’s Hispanics and Asians could give a shit about blacks. Not many blacks left anyway, but they’d all leave.

    So progressive whites, a much smaller group, would no longer be dominant. Right now, they are dominant because they get the Hispanic and Asian vote and give them political representation without giving up power because they’re the strongest overall faction in a blue state. But once it’s just them versus Hispanics and Asians (mostly Chinese), progressive whites will have far less power and Hispanics and Chinese aren’t progressive at all.

    Meanwhile, Mexico and China start sending over nationals in huge numbers to a “country” who pretends to value open borders, and come on. Who’s winning that battle?

    So pretty soon, California is an outpost of China. All that farmland, all that real estate, all that intellectual property.

    Ain’t happening. It’s amazing how many people can delude themselves, whether it be the “We hate the US and should leave!” or the “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” faction. As if the US would a) give up a huge chunk of its agricultural land and b) give China a foothold in the continent.

    I agree with Pincher that the comments here are idiotic in their ignorance of CA’s geopolitical and economic value to US, but of the 100 or so comments I read, the ignorance of basic reality was even greater.

    • Replies: @Arthur Pierce
    The real estate in California going to China is a big deal. The intellectual property? What their co-ethnics can’t give China, they can buy from Israel. I suppose the 1-2 year delay matters somewhat though.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Ed, I love it when you post. I have used your insights. But you assume that the entire state of California either leaves or stays. But we need not accept that assumption. The coast can exit while the red counties remain. Jettison the idiocy and retain the sanity. I know you will have to move, but with your talent, it will be a win-win.
  226. The American military isn’t full of nationalists who value the unity of the “nation” (lol at the idea that this zog puppet state constitutes a “nation”). It’s 75% people who are in it for college/pension/healthcare benefits, 20% zog shabbos goys, and maybe 5% misguided “Nationalists” who are going to be filtered out very quickly in the next five years or so as the military gets increasingly “Woke”. But this is irrelevant because it has the same outcome: The fighting force with the most destructive capability on earth is going to side with the zog puppet state.

    The relevant issue is Jewish institutional power. If that’s taken away, many things become possible that were previously not. Until then, any “solution” put forth, however well-meaning, is a useless distraction.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The fighting force with the most destructive capability on earth is going to side with the zog puppet state.
     
    Do you know anyone who serves? Because I do. And they have a perspective dramatically different from what you wrote.
  227. @education realist
    The thing is, as Teotoons mentions above, that there's no way California could leave. The US would never let it. It would certainly be bad for Dem control if we pretend it ever happens.

    First, 45% of whites in CA voted for Trump. I very sincerely doubt they would stay in CA in the event that the state left the union. I suspect a huge chunk of white Dems--federal workers, for starters--would stay, either. But let's assume they all state.

    White CA Republcians all go north to Washington or Oregon, or perhaps to Arizona, maybe Texas. Either turn two blue states back red or strengthen red states more.

    Blacks would, with any sense, get the hell out of Dodge, because with 45% of whites gone, the state's Hispanics and Asians could give a shit about blacks. Not many blacks left anyway, but they'd all leave.

    So progressive whites, a much smaller group, would no longer be dominant. Right now, they are dominant because they get the Hispanic and Asian vote and give them political representation without giving up power because they're the strongest overall faction in a blue state. But once it's just them versus Hispanics and Asians (mostly Chinese), progressive whites will have far less power and Hispanics and Chinese aren't progressive at all.

    Meanwhile, Mexico and China start sending over nationals in huge numbers to a "country" who pretends to value open borders, and come on. Who's winning that battle?

    So pretty soon, California is an outpost of China. All that farmland, all that real estate, all that intellectual property.

    Ain't happening. It's amazing how many people can delude themselves, whether it be the "We hate the US and should leave!" or the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" faction. As if the US would a) give up a huge chunk of its agricultural land and b) give China a foothold in the continent.

    I agree with Pincher that the comments here are idiotic in their ignorance of CA's geopolitical and economic value to US, but of the 100 or so comments I read, the ignorance of basic reality was even greater.

    The real estate in California going to China is a big deal. The intellectual property? What their co-ethnics can’t give China, they can buy from Israel. I suppose the 1-2 year delay matters somewhat though.

    • Replies: @education realist
    IP was third. Agricultural was first.
  228. First we need to break up China.

  229. @Pincher Martin
    I agree with you, but sadly many Americans no longer do.

    I'm always vexed by people who say we need to detach California, my home state, from the rest of the union. Yes, the kooks are numerous here. Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn't a moron want to give it up without a fight?

    Besides, if you retreat to the interior, they will eventually get to you. Your retreat will not win the war. It merely postpones defeat.

    Yes, immigrants of questionable value have overrun the land. But this state still has incomparable beauty and wealth. Why would anyone who wasn’t a moron want to give it up without a fight?

    The wealth and beauty are certainly true but having been overrun by immigrants, haven’t we already given up California? Lacking a functional nation, is there any “we” to “give up” California?

  230. @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    In what way is it your country? Is it anything more than a geographical location with a more or less functional government? The United States of America may be a country but is it still a nation?

    Fighting for one’s country at its most fundamental level is defending one’s homeland from foreign invasion. Lately for America, fighting for your country means foreign misadventures in service to a government that actively facilitates foreign invasion.

    If secession is treason, so is facilitating an invasion of foreigners and devaluing citizenship.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  231. @Corvinus
    "I don’t recall the SCOTUS justices being threatened in quite this way before, not by someone as high on the totem pole as Schumer."

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.

    Actually, Trump made numerous threats on the whistleblower that resulted in his impeachment.

    Trump is not on the Supreme Court. Idiot.

  232. @West Reanimator
    Calexit would be a no-lose proposition for the political right.

    Worst case scenario, the secession occurs peacefully and amicably and the political left loses all of the votes of the most populous state.

    Best case scenario, the federal government refuses to recognize Californian independence, invades, overthrows their government, executes their leaders, disenfranchises millions of Democrat “traitors” and rewrites their state constitution unilaterally.

    so a repeat of America to our CA in 1846 – when the Federal government invaded, overthrew the government, shot those that resisted, disenfranchised minorities from the vote. Hey, worked the first time.

  233. @anon
    I'm shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.
    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.
    Secession is treason. Period.

    Secession is treason. Period.

    Baseless assertion. Go sit in the corner.

  234. Tex says:

    It seems that commenters are overlooking key questions that differ fundamentally from “should the US break up”?

    On a purely abstract level, for me the fundamental question would be “can an independent Texas maintain its borders better than it could with a hostile Democrat regime in Washington actively burying us under waves of invaders?” On a purely abstract level, the answer is perhaps yes. It could hardly do worse anyway.

    But abstract questions miss the messiness of the real world. Even if Red Texas hoisted its flag, Blue Austin, Brown San Antonio, and Black Houston would be sources of great instability.

    And by instability I mean violent reaction. Instability is the key. Should or shouldn’t matter little to questions of can. Steve outlines lots of reasons the US wouldn’t break up. The big one is that dividing lines are a vast patchwork. But that is part of what is driving the instability. It’s hard to sustain a democratic republic when the cities are in ideological war with their hinterlands.

    So the real question is “can the US continue in its present form?” Again, Steve outlines lots of reasons the status quo will continue. But I think national disruption is impossible until it isn’t.

    If it comes, it’s nearly impossible to predict the outcome, or even the form of the conflict. Given mutual ideological and ethnic antagonisms, maybe it’ll be something like a mix of the Spanish Civil War and the break up of Yugoslavia. Maybe something more low-key like Germany in 1919 (except for the current lack of right-wing death squads, always handy in a struggle like this). Comparisons to 1861 are futile (again per Steve’s reasoning) except with the Border States as a model (we’re all Border States now). Reconstruction and the violence of 1866-78 might provide a clue.

    I’m pretty sure that a break up will cause a lot of death and destruction as groups find themselves on the wrong side of the border they want. Expect exhaustion, impoverishment, and chaos for many years.

    My prescription is that if conflict is inevitable, get ready for it. That’s a prescription more easily written than filled.

  235. @Arthur Pierce
    The real estate in California going to China is a big deal. The intellectual property? What their co-ethnics can’t give China, they can buy from Israel. I suppose the 1-2 year delay matters somewhat though.

    IP was third. Agricultural was first.

  236. @Anonymous
    You and many others, today.

    How old are you? If you’re over 50, you have a lot of company. If you are under 25, not so much. Kids born today won’t often feel that way when they are adults.

    That is the long and short of why the implosion of the American empire is both not imminent but quite inevitable.

    No one in 2060 will fight and die for its terminally ill corpse. Something will trigger its dissolution and new governments, plural, will form, some quickly and peaceably and perhaps some with conflict. Worst case scenario, a nuclear weapon or two is used. Probably mostly skirmishes with small arms and a few mortar or howitzer rounds.

    Agree fully. American pride is a Boomer opinion, still present albeit weaker among Gen X. The Millennials who retain those beliefs are mostly white non-college-grads who never really paid attention to the narrative and hence operate on Boomer inertia. The power of Boomer inertia is that much weaker among Zoomers.

    Those who absorbed the narrative believe that America is a nation founded by slaveowners, the odious home of racism and capitalist exploitation. Those of us who paid attention to the narrative and explicitly rejected it were left with the conclusion that America is the rainbow-flag-flying capital of Globohomo, an empire and an economy bereft of any other source of cultural cohesion: neither blood, nor beliefs, nor culture, nor even language bind us together. There’s no cause for either camp to celebrate, fight, and die for this country.

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien. We insist the Civil War must have been fought to abolish slavery. Boomer Larry David riffed on this in Curb Your Enthusiasm.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien.
     
    The guys who join your military are quite happy to die to bring "freedom and democracy" to foreign countries that don't even want it. Do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union?

    And do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union from people they'll be told are nazis?
  237. @SteveRogers42
    Nirvana already answered that question.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=MEvaQDHw8oA&feature=emb_logo

    I wanna see them burn NOW. With my own eyes.

  238. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Are you willing to put your life on the line for the cause? Because I would venture to say, no, you would not. So perhaps your fetish is wish porn…
     
    Corvinus, are you ready to die for your cause? Do recall the Algerian model, my friend.

    Death comes for us all. Are you ready to die so that your totalitarian impulses can be realized by someone else? If so, you must account for your choice.

    I am prepared to account for my actions before the Great White Throne. When my hour comes, I will say, "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" But what will you say? That you served Old Scratch, and served him well?

    You are the Mouth of Sauron, a Black Numenorean, the epitome of what the Enemy of Humanity can do with a willing minion.

    Repent of your sins, you viper. There is still time, but only a little.

    “Corvinus, are you ready to die for your cause? Do recall the Algerian model, my friend.”

    LOL. I’m not the one touting that we should we break up and will do whatever it takes to make it happen. But, to answer the question, yes, there are many causes that I have fought for and are willing to die for. You?

    “Are you ready to die so that your totalitarian impulses can be realized by someone else?”

    That would be a false characterization on your part, friend.

    “But what will you say? That you served Old Scratch, and served him well?”

    Are you a soothsayer?

    “You are the Mouth of Sauron, a Black Numenorean, the epitome of what the Enemy of Humanity can do with a willing minion.”

    Why are you mad, bro?

    Repent of your sins, you viper. There is still time, but only a little.

  239. @Federalist

    But slavery was unprofitable at more northern latitudes where blacks tended to die of respiratory infections.
     
    Why did they tend to die of respiratory infections? Has that changed? If so, why?

    Why did they tend to die of respiratory infections? Has that changed? If so, why?

    Perhaps related to TB. TB is more common in dryer climates that have less rainfall than in damper climates, although this did not stop lots of famous Brits from Emily Bronte to George Orwell from dying from them.

    Many of the deaths will have been of children, since half of slaves did not survive the first year of life. Children are very vulnerable to respiratory diseases, since their breathing tubes and lungs are small. Slaves are also known to have smoked a lot of tobacco.

  240. @Jack D
    Unless the whistleblower is a Supreme Ct. justice, what you just said is a non-sequitur.

    I get it, but my point is this–doesn’t Trump also threaten people? And if Anon7 is so concerned about politicians making a “threat”, then why isn’t she showing the same level of concern for all members of our government?

  241. Hail says: • Website
    @The Germ Theory of Disease
    "Should the United States break up?"

    Yes.

    End of story.

    Steve Sailer Readership Poll on the “Dissolution Question,” or the ‘breakup’ of the political-entity now known as the United States in its present borders, extracting data from this commentariat in three ways.

    Comment-2 being such a direct and simple reply to such a direct and simple question gives us a real chance here for proxy polling data, as follows:

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    [Reaction button data] (as of 34 hours after first posting)
    – Agrees: 14, plus the original commenter = 15.
    – Disagrees: 5.

    [Comment-reply data to #2] (direct replies made to #2) (one to three of these are arguably trolls but will count them anyway)
    – 2 commenters seem to agree but didn’t leave a reaction. (Subtotal: Yes=17.)
    – 2 commenters seem to disagree but didn’t leave a reaction, + Steve Sailer who has not taken a side, but the contents of his Taki article suggest he is a push-comes-to-shove ‘No,’ = 3. (Subtotal: No=8.)

    Other comments
    Then there is the rest of the comment section. A review of the first fifty comments from people, not otherwise classified above, finds more express agreement (#5, #9, #13 [anon], #14, #19, #23, #30, #33, #37, #39, #50) than disagreement (#3, #4, #21, #43) with the sentiment expressed in The Germ Theory of Disease’s proposition (“Should the US break up, ‘Yes’”), by my count.

    (I am reasonably sure the numbers attached to posted comments are now stable; e.g., #50 is from West Reanimator. If someone is revisiting/checking this in the future — good data for a graduate student project, BTW, if they’ll let you accept the data; the fact that these commenter-IDs are tied to long-run specific commenters means this is pretty reliable data, no tricks — you can do a full re-review and I expect your calls will fall close in line with mine, even if not necessarily identical; in any case, comments which are unclear, neutral, irrelevant, or made by people otherwise counted above are excluded from this third section.)

    Grand Total of all the above:

    28 people agree
    12 people disagree
    = 70% Agree that “the United States should break up,” n=40 Steve Sailer readers who commented or ‘voted’ (via reaction button). I don’t expect a larger sample will wildly change the result here.

    ________________

    Also note the negative reactions people had to Anon[289]’s comment deep-thread (his comment was possible trolling):

    [MORE]

    I’m shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.

    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.

    Secession is treason. Period.

    Five of the six replies are negative/hostile, only one reply agrees with the sentiment.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    I won’t lie, that’s a great setup.
  242. @dfordoom
    The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd. They've lost the Culture War. They've lost the Demographic War. They've lost the political war. So now they're taking refuge in a fantasy alternative universe in which everything can be magically fixed. All you have to do is say the word Secession three times and hey presto, secession will happen. And they'll live happily ever after in a white ethnostate from which Democrats and liberals and non-whites will be excluded (again, by magical means).

    It's the sort of thinking you get in crazy religious cults.

    The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd.

    “Alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist” is an extremely broad category that includes within it many distinctly different, conflicting, irreconcilable, and even mutually exclusive ideas and entities. What you wrote is no doubt true for many of the entities that would fall under one or more of the named labels but certainly not for all.

    To the extent that there is any single designation that my own views could be said to align with more than any other, it would seem to be dissident Right. I have considerable respect for individuals such as our host Mr. Sailer, John Derbyshire, Kevin Michael Grace and Paul Gottfried.

    [MORE]
    And I find considerable (though certainly not complete) convergence between their respective views and my own. (Note that at least three of those four have explicitly rejected White Nationalism. Derbyshire at the very least does not seem to embrace it.)

    I have little-to-no use, however, for most of the remaining individuals identified as alt-right and certainly White Nationalist with whom I am familiar. And, obviously, the mere fact that I am a Jew alone already guarantees that for many of them, the feeling is mutual.

    For someone such as Nick Fuentes and his Groypers, there is a tragic irony in how much I find myself in agreement and sympathy with so much of what they represent.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    “Alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist” is an extremely broad category that includes within it many distinctly different, conflicting, irreconcilable, and even mutually exclusive ideas and entities. What you wrote is no doubt true for many of the entities that would fall under one or more of the named labels but certainly not for all.
     
    Yes, there are plenty of differences between fringe Right groups. But they do seem to be united to a surprising extent by a sense of unreality and by a tendency to retreat into daydreams.

    Not one of these groups enjoys any support from the elites. Not one of these groups enjoys any mass support. Their response is to fantasise about magical solutions. They don't seem to understand how politics works.

    They remind me a lot of a bunch of guys I used to know who were in a Trotskyist splinter group. They thought that world revolution was about to happen any day now. The working class was about to rise up and overthrow the capitalist system. The psychology was almost identical to the psychology I see in far right groups. There's the same retreat from reality.
  243. @education realist
    The thing is, as Teotoons mentions above, that there's no way California could leave. The US would never let it. It would certainly be bad for Dem control if we pretend it ever happens.

    First, 45% of whites in CA voted for Trump. I very sincerely doubt they would stay in CA in the event that the state left the union. I suspect a huge chunk of white Dems--federal workers, for starters--would stay, either. But let's assume they all state.

    White CA Republcians all go north to Washington or Oregon, or perhaps to Arizona, maybe Texas. Either turn two blue states back red or strengthen red states more.

    Blacks would, with any sense, get the hell out of Dodge, because with 45% of whites gone, the state's Hispanics and Asians could give a shit about blacks. Not many blacks left anyway, but they'd all leave.

    So progressive whites, a much smaller group, would no longer be dominant. Right now, they are dominant because they get the Hispanic and Asian vote and give them political representation without giving up power because they're the strongest overall faction in a blue state. But once it's just them versus Hispanics and Asians (mostly Chinese), progressive whites will have far less power and Hispanics and Chinese aren't progressive at all.

    Meanwhile, Mexico and China start sending over nationals in huge numbers to a "country" who pretends to value open borders, and come on. Who's winning that battle?

    So pretty soon, California is an outpost of China. All that farmland, all that real estate, all that intellectual property.

    Ain't happening. It's amazing how many people can delude themselves, whether it be the "We hate the US and should leave!" or the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" faction. As if the US would a) give up a huge chunk of its agricultural land and b) give China a foothold in the continent.

    I agree with Pincher that the comments here are idiotic in their ignorance of CA's geopolitical and economic value to US, but of the 100 or so comments I read, the ignorance of basic reality was even greater.

    Ed, I love it when you post. I have used your insights. But you assume that the entire state of California either leaves or stays. But we need not accept that assumption. The coast can exit while the red counties remain. Jettison the idiocy and retain the sanity. I know you will have to move, but with your talent, it will be a win-win.

  244. @Arthur Pierce
    The American military isn’t full of nationalists who value the unity of the “nation” (lol at the idea that this zog puppet state constitutes a “nation”). It’s 75% people who are in it for college/pension/healthcare benefits, 20% zog shabbos goys, and maybe 5% misguided “Nationalists” who are going to be filtered out very quickly in the next five years or so as the military gets increasingly “Woke”. But this is irrelevant because it has the same outcome: The fighting force with the most destructive capability on earth is going to side with the zog puppet state.

    The relevant issue is Jewish institutional power. If that’s taken away, many things become possible that were previously not. Until then, any “solution” put forth, however well-meaning, is a useless distraction.

    The fighting force with the most destructive capability on earth is going to side with the zog puppet state.

    Do you know anyone who serves? Because I do. And they have a perspective dramatically different from what you wrote.

    • Replies: @Arthur Pierce
    I do. A couple of them are even on our side of things, politically. They’re also the most pessimistic about what side the military would take in a hypothetical conflict between zog and White people.
  245. @Wency
    Agree fully. American pride is a Boomer opinion, still present albeit weaker among Gen X. The Millennials who retain those beliefs are mostly white non-college-grads who never really paid attention to the narrative and hence operate on Boomer inertia. The power of Boomer inertia is that much weaker among Zoomers.

    Those who absorbed the narrative believe that America is a nation founded by slaveowners, the odious home of racism and capitalist exploitation. Those of us who paid attention to the narrative and explicitly rejected it were left with the conclusion that America is the rainbow-flag-flying capital of Globohomo, an empire and an economy bereft of any other source of cultural cohesion: neither blood, nor beliefs, nor culture, nor even language bind us together. There's no cause for either camp to celebrate, fight, and die for this country.

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien. We insist the Civil War must have been fought to abolish slavery. Boomer Larry David riffed on this in Curb Your Enthusiasm.

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien.

    The guys who join your military are quite happy to die to bring “freedom and democracy” to foreign countries that don’t even want it. Do you seriously think they won’t fight to preserve the Union?

    And do you seriously think they won’t fight to preserve the Union from people they’ll be told are nazis?

    • Replies: @JMcG
    I’m agnostic. I dont see a split happening. But the people who do the fighting are drawn from the people who will be called Nazis. Look at the reception that Hillary or Obama received from the men who carry rifles.
    , @Wency
    Don't get me wrong, I'm in the camp that believes the US military is absolutely prepared to fight to crush any insurrection, including an insurrection centered in areas that are heavy recruitment zones for that same military.

    Even as popular faith in the country wanes, our volunteer army is largely composed of those who are most susceptible to rah-rah propaganda (particularly among the fighting arms), and the military's techniques of delivering that propaganda are as good as ever.

    , @Anonymous
    In a pessimal, two way split, it won't even happen unless a part of the military splits off like the Confederates marching out of West Point. But a two way split is pessimal for just that reason, and many others besides.

    In a general dissolution, the military will be of limited usefulness because there won't be a "them" to fight. It's much the same problem the US faces in tribal lands where a set piece battle-the scenario they can win against-is the least likely to happen.There will be general apathy and lack of cooperation from most of the citizenry, active resistance on the part of a few. Long term sniping and IEDs and much, much, much financial outflow. As I'm sure Harold Covington correctly stated, the generals will never surrender;the accountants eventually will.

    The examples of the American revolution, Vietnam, and Northern Ireland are all instructive. But the bottom line is that the Empire will just peter out. It won't be able to pay the military, the military contractors, the federal "law enforcement" agents, and it will have increasing difficulty attracting effective recruits. Conscription won't work very well, the conscriptees will all be illiterate, fat, and stupid. Universal service won't be implemented because no one in power wants their sons to be grunts in this type of fighting.

    In a hundred years, North America will consist of at least ten different nation-states, and neither Canada, the USA or Mexico will have unchanged borders. At least two or three will have nuclear weapons, but one will have ninety percent of them. I'm guessing nuclear carriers will be as obsolete as Zeppelins, and that at least two or three of the existing ones will be on the bottom of the world's various oceans. (I'd like to see Nimitz saved as a museum ship: Enterprise would have been far better, but it's too late now.)

  246. @Dissident

    The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd.
     
    "Alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist" is an extremely broad category that includes within it many distinctly different, conflicting, irreconcilable, and even mutually exclusive ideas and entities. What you wrote is no doubt true for many of the entities that would fall under one or more of the named labels but certainly not for all.

    To the extent that there is any single designation that my own views could be said to align with more than any other, it would seem to be dissident Right. I have considerable respect for individuals such as our host Mr. Sailer, John Derbyshire, Kevin Michael Grace and Paul Gottfried. And I find considerable (though certainly not complete) convergence between their respective views and my own. (Note that at least three of those four have explicitly rejected White Nationalism. Derbyshire at the very least does not seem to embrace it.)

    I have little-to-no use, however, for most of the remaining individuals identified as alt-right and certainly White Nationalist with whom I am familiar. And, obviously, the mere fact that I am a Jew alone already guarantees that for many of them, the feeling is mutual.

    For someone such as Nick Fuentes and his Groypers, there is a tragic irony in how much I find myself in agreement and sympathy with so much of what they represent.

    “Alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist” is an extremely broad category that includes within it many distinctly different, conflicting, irreconcilable, and even mutually exclusive ideas and entities. What you wrote is no doubt true for many of the entities that would fall under one or more of the named labels but certainly not for all.

    Yes, there are plenty of differences between fringe Right groups. But they do seem to be united to a surprising extent by a sense of unreality and by a tendency to retreat into daydreams.

    Not one of these groups enjoys any support from the elites. Not one of these groups enjoys any mass support. Their response is to fantasise about magical solutions. They don’t seem to understand how politics works.

    They remind me a lot of a bunch of guys I used to know who were in a Trotskyist splinter group. They thought that world revolution was about to happen any day now. The working class was about to rise up and overthrow the capitalist system. The psychology was almost identical to the psychology I see in far right groups. There’s the same retreat from reality.

  247. Rob says:

    I wonder if Jack Henson has tried to comment on this thread.

    Barring a disaster like losing a war of choice to China or Russia, I can’t see the US breaking up. But people are sorting ideologically. Whole states, not just cities or counties, are getting redder or bluer. Does anyone think that that will stop? I can’t see left-wing areas trying to secede, their already winning, and the laws they don’t like they just ignore, like immigration or marijuana. Not to mention, the movers and shakers on the left are not economically leftist. They don’t want a command economy, and honestly believe AA only breaks ties. They think indios will assimilate to white Protestant norms.

    That leaves the right. There is no populist elite, which is why Trump has so much trouble finding acceptable people to appoint. Maybe there will be in 30 years, when whites are a minority and NAMs are still worthless. But by then Republicans will never be able to win the Presidency, and most people looking to buy politicians will invest in Democrats. Maybe when the Republican Party is non viable there will be space for a populist right. More importantly than the lack of an elite, even most populists have drunk the Kool Aid on race. How many would be not just willing to expel non-whites from Redistan? Without expelling blacks and Hispanics, there’s really no reason to go it alone.

    What are the big irreconcilable differences? As far as I can see, they’re guns, global warming, and immigration. These are big issues for boomers, but what about gen X and younger? Can these issues be solved by separation?

    The left is not willing to compromise on guns. More exactly, what we have now is a compromise, and the left won’t let up. This primary season, Beto said he’d confiscate assault rifles. Confiscation might be marginal now, but it will be mainstream in 2028.

    There’s no compromise possible on global warming. Halve the rate of excess CO2, and disaster will just be delayed a few years? The left will want us to accept millions of climate change refugees from Bangladesh at a minimum. The left definitely wouldn’t allow succession over that. That’s not an issue that will be improved by separate countries for separate peoples.

    Immigration can maybe be compromised on. It’s not clear that the left will want the alien invasion to continue after they’re solidly in power forever. Maybe we could reach a compromise where we eliminate birthright citizenship, apportion representatives and electoral college votes by number of citizens, and California can have some sort of local legal residency for illegals that doesn’t entitle them to live anywhere else, and doesn’t give their kids citizenship. Failing a compromise, immigration is an issue that could be solved by separation. Location-specific residency for legal aliens is the beginning of a compromise.

    If we do break up over the aliens, there would still need to be population transfer. Having an x percent black Redistan (for x greater than zero) is pointless. Blueistan could hardly object to the enrichment they’d get from 100 million or so non-whites, especially since they could move into housing left empty by all the whites that would move to an all white Redistan. Think of the economic stimulus they’d get building the infrastructure for all those new citizens! I don’t know how many whites would relocate to a white ethnostate, but there would be quite a few.

  248. The original American idea was a European, free, christian-ish country with responsible, self reliant people. That vision has long since been vandalized. I would not mind a national breakup, if one of the pieces can be true to the original idea.

    • Agree: Hail
  249. @Morris Applebaum IV
    Secession is one of the most important issues of the 21st century. It is an achievable goal if we're willing to work for it and not be intimidated by the short term breakup costs.

    The absurdity of our Empire was never more clear than when a Northern Californian, Anthony Kennedy, decided that 330 million Americans are required to live by San Francisco morality. Whatever one's views on gay marriage, how is it possible that the people of Alabama, for example, are required to live like San Franciscans? It would be equally absurd for San Francisco to be forced to accept Southern morality (yeah, right).

    The easiest way to get the ball rolling is to push California out of the union. Make their lives miserable until they decide to leave.

    I’d like to see Trump arrest all officers of all the ‘sanctuary cities’ for their lawbreaking behavior. That would induce them to secede. This time there won’t be a civil war, we’ll be glad to see them go.

    • Replies: @Corn
    I’ve been saying this as nearly as long as Trump has been president. Every DA, mayor, police chief, sheriff and governor who boasts they won’t cooperate with ICE should be sitting in jail on a sedition charge.
  250. The obsession with secession is a sign of the despair and desperation among the alt-right/dissident-right/white nationalist crowd. They’ve lost the Culture War. They’ve lost the Demographic War. They’ve lost the political war. So now they’re taking refuge in a fantasy alternative universe in which everything can be magically fixed. All you have to do is say the word Secession three times and hey presto, secession will happen. And they’ll live happily ever after in a white ethnostate from which Democrats and liberals and non-whites will be excluded (again, by magical means).

    It is not gracious to sneer at and mock desperate people.

  251. @Alden
    The cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco own their own water and power. California has enough food to feed itself. The ranchers and farmers are ultra liberals on the question of immigration. California food, eaten all over America is planted grown, harvested, slaughtered, packed, processed, canned, frozen and driven in trucks by the illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians so beloved by California growers and ranchers.

    The food industry is the biggest importer of illegal alien primitive Hispanic Indians. These importers of illegals include the Norman Rockwell farm family fantasies of conservatives.

    California suffered extended and extensive drought and is not too far from falling back into it. A more severe and eventually unending drought is inevitable if the population here keeps increasing beyond 40 million to 45 and 50 million (which seems likely).

    Then California won’t have the water to grow that food to feed itself, let alone export to anyone else.

    Forget culture, language, race, and all that. Just the mathematical analysis of water consumption by both households and agriculture spells fatal drought for California within the lifetime of many readers here.

  252. @dfordoom

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien.
     
    The guys who join your military are quite happy to die to bring "freedom and democracy" to foreign countries that don't even want it. Do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union?

    And do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union from people they'll be told are nazis?

    I’m agnostic. I dont see a split happening. But the people who do the fighting are drawn from the people who will be called Nazis. Look at the reception that Hillary or Obama received from the men who carry rifles.

  253. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    The fighting force with the most destructive capability on earth is going to side with the zog puppet state.
     
    Do you know anyone who serves? Because I do. And they have a perspective dramatically different from what you wrote.

    I do. A couple of them are even on our side of things, politically. They’re also the most pessimistic about what side the military would take in a hypothetical conflict between zog and White people.

  254. @Mike_from_SGV
    I'd like to see Trump arrest all officers of all the 'sanctuary cities' for their lawbreaking behavior. That would induce them to secede. This time there won't be a civil war, we'll be glad to see them go.

    I’ve been saying this as nearly as long as Trump has been president. Every DA, mayor, police chief, sheriff and governor who boasts they won’t cooperate with ICE should be sitting in jail on a sedition charge.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  255. They [fringe Right groups] remind me a lot of a bunch of guys I used to know who were in a Trotskyist splinter group.

    A different “splinter” group of the Trotskyist variety has indeed taken over the western world. And they are probably worse than the group you used to know; they are the Shining Path in nice clothes and gentler, though equally deadly, methods.

  256. @dfordoom

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien.
     
    The guys who join your military are quite happy to die to bring "freedom and democracy" to foreign countries that don't even want it. Do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union?

    And do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union from people they'll be told are nazis?

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m in the camp that believes the US military is absolutely prepared to fight to crush any insurrection, including an insurrection centered in areas that are heavy recruitment zones for that same military.

    Even as popular faith in the country wanes, our volunteer army is largely composed of those who are most susceptible to rah-rah propaganda (particularly among the fighting arms), and the military’s techniques of delivering that propaganda are as good as ever.

  257. @RichardTaylor

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.
     
    Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person? Which state doesn't force your children to be humiliated in "white privilege" exercises?

    Asking for a friend.

    “Oh cool, which state do you have free speech in? Which state gives you freedom of association as a White person?”

    All 50 states.

  258. @Anon7
    You might enjoy reading about the Dissolution of the Monasteries by Henry VIII in the 1530's.

    ...religious houses in the 16th century controlled appointment to about two-fifths of all parish benefices in England, disposed of about half of all ecclesiastical income, and owned around a quarter of the nation's landed wealth. An English medieval proverb said that if the Abbot of Glastonbury married the Abbess of Shaftesbury, the heir would have more land than the King of England.

    A leading figure here is the scholar and theologian Desiderius Erasmus who satirized monasteries as lax, as comfortably worldly, as wasteful of scarce resources, and as superstitious...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Monasteries
     
    Take the proportion of endowments and public land that relate to useless "fields of study" like gender politics and put them to better use.

    So it was an advance for the monastery lands to be sold off at fire sale prices allegedly for the benefit of the poor but really to finance the King’s wars?

  259. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    But even among Boomers, the thought of dying to preserve the Union is utterly alien.
     
    The guys who join your military are quite happy to die to bring "freedom and democracy" to foreign countries that don't even want it. Do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union?

    And do you seriously think they won't fight to preserve the Union from people they'll be told are nazis?

    In a pessimal, two way split, it won’t even happen unless a part of the military splits off like the Confederates marching out of West Point. But a two way split is pessimal for just that reason, and many others besides.

    In a general dissolution, the military will be of limited usefulness because there won’t be a “them” to fight. It’s much the same problem the US faces in tribal lands where a set piece battle-the scenario they can win against-is the least likely to happen.There will be general apathy and lack of cooperation from most of the citizenry, active resistance on the part of a few. Long term sniping and IEDs and much, much, much financial outflow. As I’m sure Harold Covington correctly stated, the generals will never surrender;the accountants eventually will.

    The examples of the American revolution, Vietnam, and Northern Ireland are all instructive. But the bottom line is that the Empire will just peter out. It won’t be able to pay the military, the military contractors, the federal “law enforcement” agents, and it will have increasing difficulty attracting effective recruits. Conscription won’t work very well, the conscriptees will all be illiterate, fat, and stupid. Universal service won’t be implemented because no one in power wants their sons to be grunts in this type of fighting.

    In a hundred years, North America will consist of at least ten different nation-states, and neither Canada, the USA or Mexico will have unchanged borders. At least two or three will have nuclear weapons, but one will have ninety percent of them. I’m guessing nuclear carriers will be as obsolete as Zeppelins, and that at least two or three of the existing ones will be on the bottom of the world’s various oceans. (I’d like to see Nimitz saved as a museum ship: Enterprise would have been far better, but it’s too late now.)

  260. @songbird
    I kind of like the idea of bifurcating the currency.

    One dollar would be gold-backed, for people who think government spending should be decreased.

    The other would be virtue-signaling/government employee bucks, designed with a slate of diverse portraits, like Sojourner Truth and Harvey Milk and interest rates determined by the Black Congressional Caucus.

    I’ve wondered if we could separate taxes into different “pots.” Each would come from each racial group’s “pay in”…..

    So wannabe Kardashian white coalburner sluts….instead of having you & me pick up the welfare tab for them would have to collect from the black tax pool etc…make her face social stigma etc. Most black women would prefer this as it would put pressure on their men to provide for them etc

    Thats the new white girl thing….act black and have kids with thugs and have white nerd tax drones finance it while they do social media social attention campaigns….

  261. https://portside.org/2017-02-02/california-just-threatened-stop-paying-taxes-if-trump-cuts-federal-funding-over

    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/01/27/california-could-cut-off-feds-in-response-to-trump-threats/amp/

    The other yr Willie Brown threatened to cut off the taxes the state collects and sends in to the fedsif Trump attacked sanctuary cities….

    This would be a de facto act of state level secession or rebellion….

    Trump would have 2 options….arrest the secessionists with federal LEOs or troops….or do nothing & have other states threaten the same thing….the deep state correctly fears a right wing coup more than a minority or leftwing coup…

    If you believe the govts story about the OKC Bombing(& i do not but IF) then 2 idiot veterans who weren’t even special operators caused billions in damage with a lousy ten grand in fertilizer and model rocket fuel….imagine what a rogue junta and say a few thousand explosives trained troops w special ops training could do….and the deep state cares nothing about OKC….but imagine if the army goes rogue & targets areas that matter to the elites….think Boston, NYC, Bay Area, DC, No. Virginia etc….OKC scared those pussies so much they targeted the militia nuts en masse after and killed McVeigh within 5 yrs of arrest to set an example to wouldbe rogue vets or soldiers like McVeigh….

    Notice the idiot Muslims who bombed the WTC haven’t been executed yet….its because the elites don’t fear them like they do right wing anti govt types….

    • Replies: @Neoconned
    Perhaps our govt is more fragile than it seems....

    Maybe all it would take is a rogue general(s) taking over the WMD football or the Montana/Dakota nuke sites....like that old 1970s Burt Lancaster film(or Richard Burton, i forget...)

    Congress, the judges and the bureaucracy would fold like a cheap flea market card table and give in....

    Study the Bonus Army incident from the Depression....the Defense Dept actually had a classified report that they chose not to use a Marine batallion near Washington to suppress the Bonus Army because they feared they would side w the veterans and sack the Hoover administration and the crooks in Congress....
  262. @Neoconned
    https://portside.org/2017-02-02/california-just-threatened-stop-paying-taxes-if-trump-cuts-federal-funding-over

    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/01/27/california-could-cut-off-feds-in-response-to-trump-threats/amp/

    The other yr Willie Brown threatened to cut off the taxes the state collects and sends in to the fedsif Trump attacked sanctuary cities....

    This would be a de facto act of state level secession or rebellion....

    Trump would have 2 options....arrest the secessionists with federal LEOs or troops....or do nothing & have other states threaten the same thing....the deep state correctly fears a right wing coup more than a minority or leftwing coup...

    If you believe the govts story about the OKC Bombing(& i do not but IF) then 2 idiot veterans who weren't even special operators caused billions in damage with a lousy ten grand in fertilizer and model rocket fuel....imagine what a rogue junta and say a few thousand explosives trained troops w special ops training could do....and the deep state cares nothing about OKC....but imagine if the army goes rogue & targets areas that matter to the elites....think Boston, NYC, Bay Area, DC, No. Virginia etc....OKC scared those pussies so much they targeted the militia nuts en masse after and killed McVeigh within 5 yrs of arrest to set an example to wouldbe rogue vets or soldiers like McVeigh....

    Notice the idiot Muslims who bombed the WTC haven't been executed yet....its because the elites don't fear them like they do right wing anti govt types....

    Perhaps our govt is more fragile than it seems….

    Maybe all it would take is a rogue general(s) taking over the WMD football or the Montana/Dakota nuke sites….like that old 1970s Burt Lancaster film(or Richard Burton, i forget…)

    Congress, the judges and the bureaucracy would fold like a cheap flea market card table and give in….

    Study the Bonus Army incident from the Depression….the Defense Dept actually had a classified report that they chose not to use a Marine batallion near Washington to suppress the Bonus Army because they feared they would side w the veterans and sack the Hoover administration and the crooks in Congress….

  263. @Achmed E. Newman
    About the money, or currency, I should say: I don't see that as any factor important to whether the US breaks up or not. The US dollar will go down the toilet anyway, once enough people, mostly elsewhere in the world, realize that the cleanest dirty shirt is still dirty.

    On a short-term basis, anything valuable will be used as currency, but I'm thinking more of a SHTF scenario, something kind of likely in any non-peaceful breakup. For the long-term, you're gonna have to start with something that IS money, and that means having your currency backed by gold and silver - what a concept!

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-payment-systems-china-usa/

    The banks are terrified of ApplePay type services….

    In China smartphone payments have already replaced cash….

  264. @RichardTaylor
    A dream that would be make so many, so happy!

    A historian recently theorized that the fall of the Western Roman Empire was necessary for Europe to evolve. The Romans were probably holding things back.

    Imagine being free of the despicable Whites who hate other Whites.

    https://www.amazon.com/Escape-Rome-Prosperity-Princeton-Economic/dp/0691172188/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=escape+from+rome&qid=1583318773&sr=8-1

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

    When Rome fell the average height in Europe dropped by over a whole foot….im assuming from dietary disruptions caused by supply chain breakdown.

    There’s strong evidence Rome’s decline coincided with solar cycle caused climate change….the same as the Mayans….

    Europe didn’t get its average height back to Roman era levels til the 1700s A.D……

    Perhaps America is worth saving….if only for the civilizational reasoning….

    • Replies: @West Reanimator

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

    When Rome fell the average height in Europe dropped by over a whole foot….im assuming from dietary disruptions caused by supply chain breakdown.

    There’s strong evidence Rome’s decline coincided with solar cycle caused climate change….the same as the Mayans….

    Europe didn’t get its average height back to Roman era levels til the 1700s A.D……
     
    Your own link contradicts your baseless assertions. Did you expect that no one would read it? Or did you honestly not even understand the study you linked to?
  265. @Anon7
    Democrats try to pretend that it is about 1850, and PoC minorities and women ("black bodies", "our bodies, ourselves") are in horrific actual bondage to white male masters.

    Republicans try to pretend that it is about 1850, and we live on small farms that are like English manors, with police too far away to help ("right to bear arms") and doctors don't know anything anyway ("no, I don't want to pay for national health care").

    I found myself thinking about this more than a decade ago, when I noticed that the Republican and Democrat parties seemed to be in a branding and advertising war.

    In branding and advertising, you choose a mental/emotional division, on one side there are your customers and on the other, people who aren't likely to buy your product anyway.

    What is the most emotional division our country went through? The Civil war. So, that's how we brand in political fights.

    No, I don't think a break-up is in the cards, mostly because the Left wants that power! All of it. Besides, would you divvy up the national debt? Divvy up the nukes? That would be great, California governors with their own nuclear weapons.

    Allowing governors control of WMDs makes for a great Ludlum novel ora “7 Days in May” type scenario….

    The CIA, generals and various ABC security agency spooks would never allow it though….

    We’d have a military coup before that wouldbe allowed to happen….

    My last post inthis awesome rabbit hole ofa thread….got work tomorrow and i think I’ve made my points….

  266. @Hail
    Steve Sailer Readership Poll on the "Dissolution Question," or the 'breakup' of the political-entity now known as the United States in its present borders, extracting data from this commentariat in three ways.

    Comment-2 being such a direct and simple reply to such a direct and simple question gives us a real chance here for proxy polling data, as follows:


    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.
     

    [Reaction button data] (as of 34 hours after first posting)
    - Agrees: 14, plus the original commenter = 15.
    - Disagrees: 5.

    [Comment-reply data to #2] (direct replies made to #2) (one to three of these are arguably trolls but will count them anyway)
    - 2 commenters seem to agree but didn't leave a reaction. (Subtotal: Yes=17.)
    - 2 commenters seem to disagree but didn't leave a reaction, + Steve Sailer who has not taken a side, but the contents of his Taki article suggest he is a push-comes-to-shove 'No,' = 3. (Subtotal: No=8.)

    Other comments
    Then there is the rest of the comment section. A review of the first fifty comments from people, not otherwise classified above, finds more express agreement (#5, #9, #13 [anon], #14, #19, #23, #30, #33, #37, #39, #50) than disagreement (#3, #4, #21, #43) with the sentiment expressed in The Germ Theory of Disease's proposition ("Should the US break up, 'Yes'"), by my count.

    (I am reasonably sure the numbers attached to posted comments are now stable; e.g., #50 is from West Reanimator. If someone is revisiting/checking this in the future -- good data for a graduate student project, BTW, if they'll let you accept the data; the fact that these commenter-IDs are tied to long-run specific commenters means this is pretty reliable data, no tricks -- you can do a full re-review and I expect your calls will fall close in line with mine, even if not necessarily identical; in any case, comments which are unclear, neutral, irrelevant, or made by people otherwise counted above are excluded from this third section.)

    Grand Total of all the above:

    28 people agree
    12 people disagree
    = 70% Agree that "the United States should break up," n=40 Steve Sailer readers who commented or 'voted' (via reaction button). I don't expect a larger sample will wildly change the result here.

    ________________

    Also note the negative reactions people had to Anon[289]'s comment deep-thread (his comment was possible trolling):


    I’m shocked that no one on this thread has spoken up for the United States of America.

    This is my country, every inch of every state, and I will never accept a breakup of my country.

    You will be shocked when millions of Americans step forward to fight for their country as they have done so often in the past.

    Secession is treason. Period.
     

    Five of the six replies are negative/hostile, only one reply agrees with the sentiment.

    I won’t lie, that’s a great setup.

  267. @indocon
    Are you kidding me? Undivided India would have been like a combination of Nigeria and Afghanistan.

    Don’t forget about the Balkans.

  268. Sam J. says:

    I wonder if the people here know they are being played? Once again you are given bad stupid choices to make while completely ignoring things we have ALREADY TRIED that worked better. I didn’t say perfectly but better. This is just more of the same. Like the debate over whether we should have a King or not. What stupidity. We don’t need a King and we don’t need to break the country up and we don’t need a civil war. We just need to implement that which we already had and was destroyed by those in power.

    We don’t need a new Constitution. The one we have is just fine. What we do need is some politicians that will work what we have in our favor. We could totally change the power structure in the country in a few months. If the Republicans were willing we could take control of the out of control Judiciary. It only takes a majority in Congress to do so. The Judges may decide case law but Congress decides what cases the Judges can rule on in the first place. Don’t want Judges to decide any laws that have to do with treaties, immigration, national security as relating to foreigners, etc. Then Congress can just tell them to butt out. It’s written right into the Constitution in plain English.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

    “…In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make…”

    [MORE]

    “…with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make…” The important part. The earlier part declares what powers they have but it ends with control of these functions by Congress. Congress could tell them to butt out of any GloboHomo, Statist rulings. They could do that with with lots of stuff they keep ramming down our throats. The Judiciary could be stuck with only deciding water rights cases between States if they push too hard to SJW the Constitution to death.

    This only takes will power and the ability to to just ignore the point and shriek of the press which would go to stratospheric levels if Congress actually limited the Judges to deciding only cases that are delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution. There’s a whole massive amount of POZZ that could be cleared up if the Judiciary was brought to heel and States would be allowed to decide for themselves. The total lock down Blue States would carry on as before but as we have seen their quality of life would eventually become so bad as to destroy their power base. The Left could be allowed to destroy themselves while limiting their ability to impose the pozz on the rest of us WITHOUT breaking up the country, civil war or any other such drastic nonsense.

    What could we change that would vastly increase the power of Whites and guarantee out rights would not be run over?

    1. First we make sure all voters have some qualifications, high school diploma or equivalent, maybe pay a certain amount of property taxes, the actual numbers are not so important. The idea is that the voter have some skin in the game. Be a taxpayer or retired taxpayer who has put into the system instead of just receiving. This was ruled against by the Supreme court but this ruling can be tossed in the trash by a 51% vote in the House and Senate. Federal judges can be told what their jurisdiction is. It’s written right into the Constitution.

    2. Federal judges, once again, have ruled that in the States there can only be representatives based on proportional representation of the population. This court ruling gave more power to urban areas. Before they had representation in the Senates of most States based on regions and population based in the House. Just like the Federal government structure. It too can be thrown out. This would vastly curtail the power of the cities to tyrannize the rural areas. Think if Upper New York State and the rural areas of California had regional representation in the Senate of the States of California and New York. It would make a huge difference. A really big societal shift. The recent gun grab in Virginia would not even be a thing. It would have never even been brought up much less almost become law. Many laws and rules the left are pushing would never even be voiced as an option because there would be zero ability for them to pass.

    3. Make sure all votes are by real registered and documented voters. Voter fraud is at extreme levels in the cities. They have more people voting than there are even voters in many districts. With the other two rules in place we would have the power to just call all their votes illegal and ignore them. We could have an electronic voting system that is foolproof against fraud, (this can be done I’m 100% positive and I even have a simple cheap way to implement). The votes could NOT be changed and each person and organization could 100% check each vote for themselves. Details here and end of the comment:

    https://www.unz.com/gatzmon/my-struggle/#comment-3739514

    The only problem with any of these systems is you must control who gets to vote in the first place and who is authorized to vote. With the two other powers in place this could be assured. We could have open voters list and only those preregistered could vote. No more showing on the day of the vote and registering. I would add that no one that immigrated could vote until the 2nd generation. If they don’t like it they can leave.

    If most States changed to the older method designed to protect minority rights, rural areas, then it would vastly improve our position. These two changes would insure that we could not be rolled over legislatively. Now some States may be lost already like California but they will lose power anyways because of the complete stupidity and incompetence of their Representatives. Detroit and other minority run cites have the same problems.

    All it would take is willpower to do this. The Republicans by party line vote have the power to do this right now and so do most States. I would say the majority. If pushed we could force the same on the other States with Constitutional amendments after power is consolidated.

    Starting from the civil war there has been nothing but one big fight between rural and urban areas. So far the cities won but it doesn’t have to stay this way. We don’t need to break up and we don’t need a civil war we just need to work the system that we already have and have had before that worked reasonably well.

  269. @Neoconned
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

    When Rome fell the average height in Europe dropped by over a whole foot....im assuming from dietary disruptions caused by supply chain breakdown.

    There's strong evidence Rome's decline coincided with solar cycle caused climate change....the same as the Mayans....

    Europe didn't get its average height back to Roman era levels til the 1700s A.D......

    Perhaps America is worth saving....if only for the civilizational reasoning....

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

    When Rome fell the average height in Europe dropped by over a whole foot….im assuming from dietary disruptions caused by supply chain breakdown.

    There’s strong evidence Rome’s decline coincided with solar cycle caused climate change….the same as the Mayans….

    Europe didn’t get its average height back to Roman era levels til the 1700s A.D……

    Your own link contradicts your baseless assertions. Did you expect that no one would read it? Or did you honestly not even understand the study you linked to?

    • Troll: Buzz Mohawk
  270. @PiltdownMan
    Thinking out of the box for a moment ... WWSD? (what would Stalin do?)

    A purge of a hundred or so university intellectuals would
    1. Focus everyone’s minds
    2. End the culture wars for good.
    3. Eliminate identity politics and limitless immigration as an option, also for keeps.

    I’m beginning to understand why authoritarianism is often a tempting choice in the governance of nations.

    😄

    I’d almost agree purging officers would be a good choice at this point.

  271. @dfordoom

    “Should the United States break up?”

    Yes.

    End of story.
     
    Is the United States going to break up?

    No.

    End of story.

    Why waste time on ludicrously silly and impractical fantasies? Even if those who own and control the country were willing to allow such a thing (and they most certainly will not allow it) there is no way it could be done.

    Explain to me how you think it could be done.

    Maybe not a violent schism, but just a slow dissolve into a United-States-in-name-only.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS