IS the USA about to break up?

Having seen headlines like these



from www.boston.com...



fromblogs.usatoday.com...



fromwindowintopalestine.blogspot.com...

and,

Originally posted by Bashibozkedi
It seems to a non-American like myself that the USA is a divided society in
some ways, also there seems to be a loathing of the central government among a section of the population that I have not come across in any other democratic country.

So Americans what do you think?

Is the USA likely to disintegrate and if so is this a good thing for America and the world in general?

I think that it is because the US isn't a democracy and never was. I think its because we are a constitutional republic thats being dissolved into corporationism or some form of kleptocracy that is sucking us all dry.

I think certain americans want to force a central government into the US system which will ultimately cause a serve disruption in our country because with the level of diversity we have, a central government is a bad idea.

It cannot possibly represent everyone equally and let the minority live how they want. The constitutional republic we were birthed from is falling apart and being replaced with a form of government that cannot repair america because america itself cannot be ruled in democracy.

Needless to say, we are getting pissed.

America hopefully will not disintergrate completely, but the truth is that the America we once knew is already disappearing, and it IS a bad thing.

I don't think the USA will break-up. Maybe people living in America will disagree but then they live there and know the situation better.

I think that people are happy when they're treated with kid-gloves and are able afford (and enjoy) a few luxuries. They're also happy when they have something to moan about (moaning is as addictive and contagious as any drug can be). When they're not happy they blame government for everything that's wrong rather than looking at what they might need to sacrifice in order to improve their and others' situation/s. Granted some problems are caused by central government but not as many as blamed. In other words, once a new president has been elected the people will give him/her a honeymoon period, will feel happier for a while until things that a president cannot improve do not improve whence they start to feel the same again.

Little ever changes in politics, society and economics save the faces and words. People in the USA like to be called American and like the idea of America; the rest of the world likes to hear about America and American film stars; everybody likes to moan about authority (which America is and has) and it will always be this way. America is not about to break-up. I hope it never does. It's a young nation and still offers a lot of hope to a lot of the world even if only as an ideal. It is having problems now which wont last forever. America has a long way to go and I hope it gets back on track as being the "Land of the Free" that fosters good-will, enterprise, free spirit and the democracy that it was originally intended to demonstrate to the world. And only the American people can put America back on track; and I hope they do.

Thank you both for your replies.

Like both of you I don't want to see the USA break up,and don't see it happening in the IMMEDIATE future at any rate.

Any one else got a different opinion?

I believe that for survival the United States will have to decenterallize.There are far to many differing opinions across the country.The evidence of this can be seen in the last two elections(and the one that is up comming)If you look at the way the country is divided between conservative and liberal almost a north and south split with the exception of California which leans more liberal and would be(for the sake of this arguement)a northern state.I can see the U.S.divided at the Mississippi river.Then again with a line from Virgina across the northern border of Kentucky and Missouri all the way across the country to the California border.The country would be divided into four quadrants.The Northeast and the Southeast on the east side of the Mississippi river(this section would be known as the "lesser"United States) The other two sections would be the Northwestern and Southwestern with California belonging to the Northwestern section(the sections west of the Mississippi river would be known as the "greater United States)
Each section would have their own respective Presidents.These Presidents would meet for mutual reasons such as trade and common defense. Otherwise each section would be soverign unto itself.

That's the way I see it in the next twenty years or so.

reply to post by daddyroo45


Maybe it's a different type of union that is needed...

Consider the EU. It started as the (and I may need correcting) EEC (European Economic Community) and gradually became the EU (European Union) which is tending toward a USE (United States of Europe). Disregarding hidden agendas, from the peoples' viewpoint the EEC was about free trade, lower taxation; the EU was about the EEC with a common currency (the Euro), no borders requiring passports and all the rest that comes with having no borders; the USE (might get a different name) is about standard laws, regulations, a single government with one president and all the rest that is common between all states of the USA.

The people of Europe can be divided according to social and civil norms as Northern (German, Dutch, France, Luxembourg etc...), Southern (Spain, Italy, Greece etc...) and Eastern (Czech Republic, Poland etc...) groups. As a political unity with common laws and regulations throughout it will fail because our nations' climates, social histories, temperaments and desires that dictate the majorities needs are different. Having a common currency, economy, free trade, open borders and some common taxation (as necessitated) could work quite well. I can't go on too much because I'd need a few hundred posts.

What I'm getting at is that maybe the USA, like us in Europe need a union that has limits - a central treasury (common currency, taxation and social assistance), a semi-centralised international political front (like the UN and NATO), open borders (which requires central taxation to prevent double taxation and non-domiciles that escape taxation), some common basic rights and only common laws and regulations that are required for taxation. It may not sound too different to the current set-up but it does at least ensure that each member state is autonomous and prevents larger states from bullying/swallowing smaller states.

So what are we saying here?

That the Federal Government is the king of England and we must at some point become the Sons of Liberty? I wish it could go down like that. Then again, it doesn't happen over night. People will come, then they won't. More will come when it gets worth and so on and so forth. People, no matter how jaded or blind, eventually reach a boiling point.

I have no magic 8 ball. Do I wish it? No. Is there another way? At this point I do not have enough information to wrap my head around a proper answer.

We've become the thing that our forefathers hated. We are the taxed bastard child of England but with out rights or proper representation. Funny thing history. How many do-overs do we get?

The Federal government was never intended to be what it is today. But who is going to stop the beast, when the so-called people who represent us do not really even seem to care as long as their pockets are lined?

When the level of gross taxation approaches 40-45% the levels off anger and angst can expect to cause all sorts of repercussions politically. There is historical evidence that would lend credence to this. Working class people will generally tolerate 25-35% taxation, but begin to rail when these numbers get higher.

Historically in America, higher incomes are regularly taxed at this level, but with this caveat, typically they exert more influence politically and therefore can seek relief with favorable legislation to ease this tax burden. Most of us are familiar with the different kinds of relief they get legislated for themselves. Corporate tax relief, subsidies for different products, tariffs, income sheltering through multi-national holdings, capital gains relief, special dispensation for industries critical to "National Security", and so on. The lower and middle classes don't usually exert this kind of influence, but, also typically their tax rates don't usually go this high and stay there for long.

Also of note historically, the national government laid the solid historical precedent of smashing into oblivion anything that rears its head too high against its' authority, i.e., the "Civil War". Secession will not be tolerated by the Federal government under any circumstances. The Federal govt would not hesitate, in an extreme case, to "federalize" troops and impress property in the name of preserving the "Union". Lincoln was no fool and most of his predecessors are not either. The Federal govt will let them, the secessionists, make all the noise they want to, but any serious activity to undermine their control will meet with a fearsome response.

This is something I have thought about over and over for years. My study of the Civil War and the Reconstruction has pretty much confirmed my gut feelings about the subject. In the worst case scenario they will surround the agitators and burn them out or starve them out, a scene that we have witnessed on more than one occasion.

The US will break up. It's dead and bloating.

Time to be born anew, ladies and gentlemen.

Some of us people knew this was gunna happen the way it's BEEN happening for years, and there have been countless people saying these things, in the gov't, in the MSM, and on the fringe, and yet they all get completely brushed off, and we carry on the horde like everything's ripe and dandy, even though there's destruction all around us.

In order for the world to survive, the US must fall. It's hard to undertsand why when you believe so much ina namesake... but the nakesake was aways a lie. The natives have known this since the white man's arrival here.

Are we whites just completely deaf to the plight and warnings of others? Do we Westerners feel so vindicated in our currupted lifestyles?

Open up your ears to everyone next time, and maybe we can do things right when the new day arises.

Lies are never meant to last. They are meant to distract.



[edit on 21-3-2008 by indierockalien]

Originally posted by grimreaper797

I think that it is because the US isn't a democracy and never was. I think its because we are a constitutional republic thats being dissolved into corporationism or some form of kleptocracy that is sucking us all dry.

I think certain americans want to force a central government into the US system which will ultimately cause a serve disruption in our country because with the level of diversity we have, a central government is a bad idea.

It cannot possibly represent everyone equally and let the minority live how they want. The constitutional republic we were birthed from is falling apart and being replaced with a form of government that cannot repair america because america itself cannot be ruled in democracy.

Needless to say, we are getting pissed.

America hopefully will not disintergrate completely, but the truth is that the America we once knew is already disappearing, and it IS a bad thing.

I agree with your 1st paragraph... but your 2nd... umm... it seems to me we've had a "central government" for quite some time now. States rights to govern areas of law have been restricted or removed long ago... what the Federal lawmakers say, goes. 3rd paragraph... "being replaced with a... democracy"... what? Where have you been. We've been a democracy even longer than my prior statement... this is what put America in dis-repair.

I first heard about this in the 70's and it was mainly small radical groups that want to secede at county levels. There were regions, at county levels, throughout western Oklahoma, Kansas, and eastern Colorado that had very public action for seceding from the USA. These were Minutemen organizations (the original, not the wanna-be ones that you have today) and Posse Comitatus groups.

This has fairly well died down until the last 8 years or so and has come back stronger then ever.

There is quite a movement within the Hispanic culture for the secession of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California to it's historical base of a more Hispanic origin. Areas of Idaho and Oregon have sprung back to life with a second generation of white separatists crying the same thing there parents said, only louder and wider in audience. You have some other groups listed that were historically active.

The immediate future, next 10 years or so, no; the politics just aren't there yet. Let the Hispanics gain some more local and national officials and have the voting power to back the legislation, then it might get interesting.

I believe that for survival the United States will have to decenterallize

I am in favour of decentralisation (a key anarchist concept ) as it brings government closer to the people

Consider the EU. It started as the (and I may need correcting) EEC (European Economic Community) and gradually became the EU (European Union) which is tending toward a USE (United States of Europe). Disregarding hidden agendas, from the peoples' viewpoint the EEC was about free trade, lower taxation; the EU was about the EEC with a common currency (the Euro), no borders requiring passports and all the rest that comes with having no borders; the USE (might get a different name) is about standard laws, regulations, a single government with one president and all the rest that is common between all states of the USA.

I have my reservations about the EU ,precisely because of these hidden agendas you mention. Europe is being driven forward into becoming a single state despite various votes against this at national level (eg Denmark and France).

We in the UK voted for the EEC ( a free trade area ) but find we are getting
the EU (a large single state) so it appears we were lied to (unsurpisingly perhaps-we are talking about politicians).

Also it seems to me that not only must change be in the right direction but the rate of change must be in the right direction too.

Originally posted by RabbitChaser
I agree with your 1st paragraph... but your 2nd... umm... it seems to me we've had a "central government" for quite some time now. States rights to govern areas of law have been restricted or removed long ago...

Not entirely. We are still in a transition period. We are transitioning out of a constitutional republic into a corporatist system, or maybe a form of kleptocracy as I stated before that. With that transition is a continuing increase in centralized government. If you think states rights are limited now, you have a great deal left to see because we are far from completing the transition.

what the Federal lawmakers say, goes.

Usually, yes. Not always though. Alot of things must be passed as constitutional law first and that isn't the easist thing to do.

3rd paragraph... "being replaced with a... democracy"... what? Where have you been. We've been a democracy even longer than my prior statement... this is what put America in dis-repair.

No, we have never been a democracy and we still aren't. I'm very glad we aren't. We do use parts of a democratic republic but to classify the US as such would be a gross misrepresentation. We were a constitutional republic. That system uses a representative republic form of government when it comes to voting and such, but it is much more than just that.

I honestly don't think that anyone can accurately call the US a democracy. (Now its more corporatism/kleptocracy becauses its moving away from constitutional law under the guise of democracy. Trying to phase out constitutional law and rights and replacing it with the majority mentality, which is what democracy is)

See they want you to believe its a democracy, because in a democracy, as long as the majority agree with something, you can get it passed. In a constitutional republic you can't do that. Democracy comes down to which group can best manipulate the masses, and let me tell you, right now a mass of americans are being easily manipulated to believe we are something that we are not. Like I said, its a transitioning period.

First let me say that I don't give out too many stars and in this thread alone I dropped down 2 of them. If I had the authority to so, I would have given applause so I guess you have to be happy with the stars for I felt they were well thought and writen posts and most importantly how you truely feel. Take that as you will.

The easiest solution to return the government to the hands of the people would be to enforce term limits on the legislative branch. The idea of the federal government service was to be that of performing a civil duty. The proffiteering of long term careers has lead to the corruption.

Next step would be that of a time limit of a campaign. We currently have three Senators, recieving full pay that have spent the past nearly two years derelict in their duties. That's 3% under-representation, not that these three actually have the concerns of representing the ideas of their constituents foremost above their own selfish desires.

Lobbyists and PAC were a noble theory. The right of assembly and petition rolled into one, two bad the payola scheme of bribes and kickbacks are too prevalent and unreported. Career politicians make this scam all too easy.

It is long past time that the public is taught how to read the preamble and hold the elected to it in the following manner:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union (establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity) do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So long as the people fear the government and not the other way around, there is no true representation. The Civil War's worst outcome was the establishment of that fear of the power of the federal government, when just a few years earlier an idealist man and a few followers stormed and captured the national armory in Harper's Ferry, VA (now WV in direct violation of Constitutional Law unless the secession of VA was federally recognised as legal thus making the Civil War to preserve the union illegal)

reply to post by Ahabstar



Im not sure if your post was directed to me or just a general post but I will respond to it.

There is no easy way to return the government to the hands of the people. It will be a long hard road. It will take alot of time and effort to get back on the right path, but it is possible.

Although your ideas are very good, they are not the first steps to returning government to the hands of the people. I thought about it long and hard, asking myself many questions. I said to myself "Things are so twisted these days. The great system we loved has become so corrupt and twisted that it is almost unrecognizeable. Where do we start?"

That is the real question. Where do we start? It's not term limits, Getting rid of lobbyists, or campaign limits. The start is education. The start is motivating the people of our country to learn. Not to sit them in a classroom and force them to learn history, but to motivate them to learn. To excite them. That is the first and only step we can take to successfully changing the path of this country.

This country does need a revolution, but people assume a revolution comes with the barrel of a gun. No assumption could be more wrong. NO revolution can come by a gun. A revolution can ONLY come by an idea. This idea blossums and becomes a guiding light. THAT is a revolution. There is this belief that a revolution can't be successful without violence because the violent will use violence to beat us. The truth is though, if you revolt with violence, you don't change the game, just the players, and nothing ever changes. That is not a revolution, but mob rule. What we need a revolution.

Let education be your revolution, and let the philosophy of learning catch on like a brush fire. Nothing can be accomplished without the will of the people. We must find the heart of the people, and will it.

reply to post by sharkman


Actually, just wait until the mega wealthy have to get off the corporate welfare. Then You'll see the country erupt, they'll find a way to pit us against one another to suit there needs as always.

reply to post by Ahabstar


You are with out a doubt RIGHT!! The war between the states brought federalism to the fore front.The states lost all rights to run their own business.The federal gov.has the last call on any decisions made by the state.Also to block any state from seceding from the union was and is unconstitutional.

reply to post by Bashibozkedi

First and foremost let me say that "These" United States were not founded as and are not today a Democracy. A Democracy is one of the most vile and detestable forms of governance known to man where 51% can force it's will upon 49% of the people. No, we have as the poster has already stated a "Constitutional Republic" in which certain rights are afforded to all citizens and therefore can never be taken away "by law." Now wheather or not we observe due diligence in keeping said rights from being trampled upon is entirely laid before us to hold our ground. And I must say that we as a nation have done a piss poor job thus far!
My second point is that I say "These" United States to drive home the the fact that we are in fact a "Union" of Semi-Autonomous States. Our mislead populous, dim witted Presidents (of late), and some people around the world have been led to believe that this is one country and it is that simple mostly in part by the use of the title "The" United States.
You see a subtle play on words can connotate a whole lot of things and not realy come across as being very significant at all. The word "These" implies many where as "The" sugests one. This country was formed with the idea of self governance at the heart of it's being and our founding fathers knew that what was good in Maine may not bode well in say South Carolina. For that reason each state had free reign over it's own laws, some taxation, commerce, malitia, and almost any other thing that an independent country would. There were few things that the Federal Government took charge of such as currency, interstate/international commerce disputes, taxes to fund the Fed. Gov., and not too many other things.
You see we have always been seperate yet united. We have never been "The" United States, rather "These" United States. A country where people in Illinois may well say "you can't smoke weed" yet if California says "go ahead and toke up" we may not agree but they have their right to live the way they choose and make legal what ever they see fit.
Americans as a whole have no real desire to seced from one another in as much as they would rather secede from the overbearing and (dare I say) oppressive sort of government that has become our Federal Government. Which I might add has sat too long for any good that it may have done in the past. Today it has gotten far too powerful and must be checked if we are to remain free at all.
There is no problem with this form of government that we have now only that it has been unexercised in it's true form for far too long. We have checks and balances that are no longer in use. A Legislature that has run a muck with far too many laws and is impotent or derelict in it's duty to place checks on a President that runs rough shod over the Bill of Rights and Constitution. All the while the Judiciary Branch that should be hard at work striking down nonsense laws does little more than sit on it's hands and hand down luke warm opinoin's at best.
Yet still I must play devils advocate and say that the Federal Government doesn't even have the man power to enforce the Federal Laws that people cry so much about. The states and local governments do the arresting and enforcment. Why, because they will not stand up for what their people want and rather do the bidding of the Feds in order that they do not loose their Federal funding in the schools, police depts., and other public projects. Not to mention political backing. So the next time you are sitting around singing the praises of the Federal Gov. make sure to remember who it is that's enforcing the laws.
As for the question that i believe was asked, Yes this countries problems can be fixed. But first we need to do away with these stupid notions of "Party lines" and yes I am going to say it. Just because you fall into the demographics targeted by The Republican Party it is not the only way to go and vice versa just because you fall into the targeted demographics of The Democratic Party doesn't mean that it is the way for you. Or I'm a woman so I have to vote for Hillary. I say to all of you that think in this manner that you don't belong anywhere near a ballot box and are part of the reason why this country is the way it is today, and are the main cause for this circus of a political system we now have "IF"this describes you.
Stop listening to the Pundits and think for yourselves. Listen to a debate, or maybe even (wait now, this may be shocking) a third party candidate. "What's that you say" yes third party they aeren't all crazy. As a people lets get more involved and maybe listen in on a debate once in a while and stop being spoon fed our opinions and develope our own for a change. Working class, poor, minority, woman doesn't necessarily = Demecrat. And Rich, middle class, white, male doesn't always = Republican.
We can fix our country we just need to get involved first of all. Next we need to understand that the President isn't our King and place more emphasis on local and Congressinal elections and try holding these people responsible for their duty to us, country, and campaign promises. Push them to repeal laws that are not in line with our Constitution on the Federal level and not to enforce on the local level. It has been done before. Remember that a government derives it's power only through the concent. Tell your locol representatives to stop supporting and you can refuse to concent.
As for the comment that a previous poster made about the Latin movement for secession in the south western states. I believe that they are political plants put here by or supported by the Mexican Government. Which I will add makes no effort to hide the fact that it promotes illegal immigration (at least under Pres. Fox) this may all be an affort to regain these territories. Call me crazy if you like but it could be a possibility. In any event (I know I'm off the mark but) I think it's good that people want to come here and start a new life and do well when they can't do so in their place of birth. But, America has laws and limitations that must be followed and for anyone to place the burden of one country's failed policies and lack of concern for it's citizens onto another because they are neighbors is wrong and unfair. If it's the whole Mex/ American war, they took the $5 Mil. and signed the treaty.

Thank you for you replies . This is getting really interesting! I am learning a lot here.

Without the internet how could I possibly learn what intelligent Americans really think about the way their country is run, without having it put through the deliberately distorting filter of mass media.

One of the reasons that Communism fell was that, due to modern communications, people could find out for THEMSELVES what conditions were like in the West,so by-passing the government propaganda machines.

In Bulgaria a hacker got into the files of the secret police and deleted them all.

I think the internet will be part of the way to educate people that a previous poster mentioned.

Stop listening to the Pundits and think for yourselves. Listen to a debate, or maybe even (wait now, this may be shocking) a third party candidate. "What's that you say" yes third party they aeren't all crazy

At the time of the Bush/Gore dead-heat election, I thought that that could never happen here in the UK as we have three parties.In the event of a dead-heat between the two main parties they are both forced to negotiate with the third party ,by modifying their policies,in order to form a government.

Problems arise when you have more than three parties,and you can end up with ineffective coalition governments that don't last, made up of uneasy alliances between parties with vastly different beliefs. This has frequently happened in Italy, for example.

reply to post by lazy1981


I'm not American but understand and agree with your comments. We in Europe are progressing toward America's current state of unity i.e one government to preside over member states stripped of their own autonomy and sovereignty. In Europe we should have stayed as autonomous, sovereign states with open borders between member states and only the common laws and taxation that open borders necessitates. If I understand correctly, you have stated roughly the same idea.

As for people voting a particular way based on the circumstances with which they identify... Politicians like uniformity because they want to control everything and everybody and become scared of items they can't quantize - they need stereotypes/pigeonholes that they can treat as a group. This ties in nicely with most people. Most people like to identify with group labels because it gives them a sense of security and a means with which to weigh themselves (behaviour, wealth et alia) and facilitates decision making (when someone identifies with a group, in their own minds, they can assume the group's interests are at one with their own so they go along with its decisions). Ergo, politicians aided by other interested parties identify a framework into which people can be categorized, people happily identify with their allotted little box hence each group can be manipulated according to each group's collective mind-set. It's easier to move several groups than a bunch of individuals whom might otherwise have constituted those groups.

People are not to blame for their "identities." We are (on the whole) geared-up, biologically, to identify with groups. It stems from being social animals. It aids social bonding. Those who do not identify are seen as outsiders and thus are not trusted and may be readily blamed for society's or that group's problems. Some of us are different (I am one of them) and those differences are dispised by others whom see true individuality as being abhorrent to social nature (which it is). Don't be too hard on people. People are people and people who are different just need to keep their morals about them, help where they can and push gently forward toward a civilization within which we all can live peaceably.