Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you split up the country everyone will have to pick new names for the separated countries. It wouldn't be USA any more. So what would be the new names?
That's one thing we all agree on. But no one is talking about Communism. What we're talking about is splitting the country. Maybe it does need to happen but what a mess it would be. First, we'd each have to find new names because we wouldn't be the UNITED States anymore.
And I don't think we could join with Canada because they are affiliated with Britain. One country can't just melt into another country. We could become very much more aligned with them though in trade and probably in other ways. Prescription drugs are so much cheaper in Canada so we could buy from them.
Thing is, it might make sense now to split but what happens in the future? And what happens when people want to move from the country that has Mississippi to the country that has Pennsylvania? Or vice versa?
It might be like our own BREXIT. We want o-u-t. They can have their confederacy and we can have our own country too.
Well we've solved more difficult problems, I think it's possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove
Communism won't be tolerated in America. Those that continue to press for it will surely come to understand this.
Well we've solved more difficult problems, I think it's possible.
No one suggested communism.
When people don't know what else to say they call people names, like Communist.
But back to what we were discussing. Maybe Abe Lincoln was wrong about uniting the country. The red states could become the Confederate States of America and the blue states would be the Union States of America. There would be no more United States of America.
What about the folks who need help? Do they wander over to the blue states or are they SOL?
There would need to be a transitional period but after that, they are SOL. They need to accept the choice they made and if they choose to live in a region where abortion is illegal and no social programs, they need to accept the consequences.
There's a better solution. Simply deport those who want to live under a socialist government to the open borders blue states. Kind of like how Mexico and Central and South America are dumping their poor into the US and sticking us with the bill for their support.
When people don't know what else to say they call people names, like Communist.
But back to what we were discussing. Maybe Abe Lincoln was wrong about uniting the country. The red states could become the Confederate States of America and the blue states would be the Union States of America. There would be no more United States of America.
He wasn't wrong imho.
Quote:
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
February 22, 1861
Mr. Cuyler:
I am filled with deep emotion at finding myself standing here, in this place, where were collected together the wisdom, the patriotism, the devotion to principle, from which sprang the institutions under which we live. You have kindly suggested to me that in my hands is the task of restoring peace to the present distracted condition of the country. I can say in return, Sir, that all the political sentiments I entertain have been drawn, so far as I have been able to draw them, from the sentiments which originated and were given to the world from this hall. I have never had a feeling politically that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence. I have often pondered over the dangers which were incurred by the men who assembled here, and framed and adopted that Declaration of Independence. I have pondered over the toils that were endured by the officers and soldiers of the army who achieved that Independence. I have often inquired of myself, what great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so long together. It was not the mere matter of the separation of the Colonies from the motherland; but that sentiment in the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but, I hope, to the world, for all future time. It was that which gave promise that in due time the weight would be lifted from the shoulders of all men. This is a sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independence. Now, my friends, can this country be saved upon that basis? If it can, I will consider myself one of the happiest men in the world, if I can help to save it. If it cannot be saved upon that principle, it will be truly awful. But if this country cannot be saved without giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be assassinated on this spot than surrender it.
Now, in my view of the present aspect of affairs, there need be no bloodshed and war. There is no necessity for it. I am not in favor of such a course, and I may say, in advance, that there will be no bloodshed unless it be forced upon the Government, and then it will be compelled to act in self-defence.
My friends, this is wholly an unexpected speech, and I did not expect to be called upon to say a word when I came here. I supposed it was merely to do something toward raising the flag. I may, therefore, have said something indiscreet. (Cries of "No, no") I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God, die by.
As for the Confederate States of America? They may have lost the War however they were allowed to control the historical narrative despite the historical evidence.
Georges Santayana is likely best remembered for
Quote:
"Those who do not remember history, are condemned to repeat it.”
Significantly, Mr. Santayana also observed:
Quote:
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes.”
There's a better solution. Simply deport those who want to live under a socialist government to the open borders blue states. Kind of like how Mexico and Central and South America are dumping their poor into the US and sticking us with the bill for their support.
Again, the delusion that people in blue states want open borders.
Not to mention, calling us socialists. You forgot to call us Communists though.
Just split into two countries. You can keep your illegals however; many of your states are the problematic ones that lie on the border. You get to deal with illegals all by yourselves. Use your own money to build a wall. We would have used drones and more border guards along with other more modern measures.
There would, of course, be some moving around once the vote was clear on which way a state would go.
For example, conservatives in California would likely find more conservative states to live in. But since we are regularly reminded through countless threads on C-D about what a hell hole California is, this might be just the incentive some need to move to somewhere they would prefer to live. Alabama? Georgia? Oklahoma? West Virginia?
Liberals living in red states would be doing the reverse. Instead of taking comfort in living in a liberal area, even thought the state itself was conservative, they would have to take a good hard look at whether this was the future they wanted or if moving to a liberal state would be a better fit for them and their future.
Retired liberals living in conservative states would have to decide whether the pleasant climate was worth the uncertainty of losing future Medicare and Social Security benefits. Conservatives have been clear about going after them and given that the red states would have only 1/3 of the economy to start out with, and at least some of the workers paying into the system heading to the more prosperous liberal states, well, you can see where this would be a concern.
If you mean by the first time, the Civil War, I'm guessing it was more complicated ...
If internet & forums like this one existed back then?
I'd say it would be no more complicated to get US to kill each other in a Civil War in the present day. A case might be made that it would far easier what with the existence of Internet, etc.
I just don't think we should let ourselves be conned into doing so this time around.
Shame Liberals talk about splits. It would be so much easier to learn to live together and find moderate compromises.
Splitting ain't going to happen so get it out of your head. There's too much invested in joint ownership in Federal Lands, Military Bases, Common Good. I own part of all those Federal Lands in California. I'm not wanting to sell my share. I like having a Military Base In San Diego.
Besides you'd have wars inside of states. Those Red Counties inside Washington for example won't let Seattle completely run the show. As it is now they get power by being involved with other conservatives in other states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kind of like how Mexico and Central and South America are dumping their poor into the US and sticking us with the bill for their support.
