Breaking Up
Date: December 8th, 2008
Category: Human Nature
Back in the early eighties, when I was publishing my newsletter The Tortoise Report, the thought crossed my mind that the crumbling U.S. empire might find itself breaking up into smaller pieces — as Rome and the British Empire did.
When it comes to ruling over people, even I agree that bigness is bad. The most recent example of this is the former Soviet Union. With its satellite countries biting at its ankles at an accelerating pace and its troops bogged down in Afghanistan, the bitter truth finally came to the surface: With all its military might, the thugs in Moscow couldn’t control the disintegration of their “Union.”
Panarin sees the U.S. breaking up as a direct result of a total collapse of the U.S. economy. Further, he believes that China and Russia will replace the United States as “regulators of world markets.” And he may be on to something, because both of those countries have one big advantage over the United States: Their politicians don’t have to bid for votes!
Instead, the top dogs use a simple formula to maintain order: CT = GYBK (Causing Trouble = Getting Your Butt Kicked).
Though it is a bit offensive to those of us who prefer persuasion over force, the CT = GYBK formula, sort of a simplified version of Machiavelli’s advice on the subject of keeping the masses in line, is remarkably effective. Dictatorships (and it looks likely that Russia is again headed in that direction) violate the rights of their citizens, repress free speech, and can be brutally harsh in handing out punishments.
Hmm … come to think of it, that sounds a bit like the U.S. Our government violates the rights of its citizens and is moving rapidly toward the elimination of free speech (i.e., the elimination of conservative and libertarian free speech). But, in all fairness, it is not nearly as harsh (yet) when it comes to meting out punishments to dissidents.
In any event, I agree with Professor Panarin that the U.S. economy has barely begun its collapse, and that there is no way it can sustain the government’s insane fiscal policies. Regardless of whether we have a deflationary or inflationary collapse (or both!), millions of folks are certain to become downright hostile toward Washington as their standard of living continues to decline.
And if that hostility leads to “civil disobedience,” a dictatorship could be the government’s only way of maintaining control. But even if that should happen, I doubt it would last very long. The U.S. government is too much of a clumsy giant to maintain dictatorial control indefinitely, because there are still too many Americans who take Patrick Henry’s words seriously.
The reality is that no one knows for certain how things are going to play out in the coming years, but I believe there is a real possibility that the United States could eventually break up into a number of independent states or regions. Notwithstanding what I said earlier about all fifty states now being infected with the HIV virus, the people who live in Oklahoma are still as different from Californians as the Kurds are from the folks in Baghdad.
The primary reason Iraq has been able to force the Kurds to remain under its control is because of its small geographical area (roughly twice the size of Idaho) and its relatively small population (about 28 million). And, of course, it helps to have the freedom-loving U.S. and other Western countries insist that the Kurds not be set free.
Remember that paragon of wisdom, Rodney King, who once asked, “Why can’t we all just get along?” The answer, Mr. King, is because thousands of years of human history have clearly demonstrated that people of different cultures don’t particularly like to be around each other.
I said cultures, not colors. In this day and age, I don’t think many people care about skin color. But they do care about the social and cultural mores of their neighbors. Which brings me back to a possible breaking up of the U.S. If it should occur, I don’t see it happening along the lines Professor Panarin suggests. I believe many states would secede individually, and a number of them would work to weed out the dreaded HIV virus and return to Jeffersonian principles of government.
In other words, ideology would be the driving force behind such a breakup. Which would probably make Panarin’s view accurate in some respects — e.g., on ideological grounds, it might be convenient for such states as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Maine to stick together in the Northeast, and California, Oregon, and Washington to form a coalition of some kind on the Left Coast.
To paraphrase the signers of that long-ago-forgotten document: It is the right of the people to alter or abolish the government and institute new government. It is not only their right, but their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security.
Of course, Rodney King’s thinking is correct — it would be much simpler if we could all just get along. But at this late date, what odds do you think Vegas bookmakers would give on that ever becoming reality?
December 8th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Once Texas, California and New Mexico stop feeling economically advantaged by being part of the Union…why stay…why not become a free Latino country…
If, Quebec did not see economic disadvantages in seceding from the Confederation, here in Canada, they would long have been gone.
December 8th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
In California, the San Fransisco Bay Area and the Los Angeles area, are Left Wing Liberal. Most all, of the rest of the state, is Conservative. These are the areas, that Grow the Food and are productive in ways the two metro areas are not. I have thought for years, that California, Oregon & Washington, would some day, split from the rest of the “Union.” California at one point was the 4th largest economy in the world. I’m sure that has changed, But, I totally agree with you, the Union cannot stand, as things are, and they’re only going to get worse. Thank you for you wisdom and insight in to what’s realy happening in this, crazy upside down world we have come to live in.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Glenn Beck had a heyday with this article from the Drudge Report sometime last week. Although it is an alarming thought, I will say as a resident of Utah, I am very tired of paying for welfare “benefits” for mothers in New York. Heck, I am pretty much sick of paying for them for mothers in UT!
That reminds me of a conversation I witnessed last week in a convinience store gas station. While the cashier was supposed to be working, she was on the phone with social services. Before saying hello, she said “Yeah, I lost my food card, so I need to get another one.” When they apparently told her that wasn’t going to happen, she said “Last time I lost it they gave me another one!”. When they apparently said no again, she said , sounding very exasperated, “Can I talk to my case worker?” While she was on hold, she took the Lord’s name in vain, and then said “They are sooooo stupid around there!” The whole conversation made me lose my appetite for my frozen yogurt. It’s pretty sickening to think that my tax dollars enable that type of behavior.
I have never seen a case where welfare helps people out of their situation. All the welfare recipients I have had contact with simply learn to work the system, and milk it for all it’s worth. I know one family who lives in Section 8 (meaning the government pays their rent) housing, both parents are on disability, and they sit around and get wasted all day and neglect the kids. They recently decided their weren’t enough “opportunites” here, so they have moved to Oregon (sigh).
My least favorite welfare recipients were some tenants of mine, who did $5000 dollars damage to a 3 year old condo, and then expected me to return their deposit. Actually, their deposit was paid by the state, so when I talked to the social worker, he said just go ahead and give it back to them, the state would “gift” it to them. I made it very clear that no tax payer money was going to be “gifted” to to these people. Don’t ask me how I rented to these people in the first place. I’d rather forget the lies and manipulation that got me into the situation!
“To paraphrase the signers of that long-ago-forgotten document: It is the right of the people to alter or abolish the government and institute new government. It is not only their right, but their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security.”
To add to the above quote Thomas Jefferson also said that he figured a good revolution should take place about every 20 years. (Okay, that was also paraphrased, but that was the essence of it.) I sure hope it doesn’t ever come to that, but I don’t know how much longer I can sit by and watch this continual string of “bailouts”. Heaven help us!
December 8th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Not everyone in Texas is Latino, I know it is hard to believe but it is true. If the Republic of Texas is to break off from the good ole USofA we will have to do it on the backs of the conservatives in this state not the Latinos. The majority of latinos suffer from HIV virus, most of the legal, and probably illegals also, latinos that I know voted for Obama in the hopes of free everything. They have actually told me that they believe that Obama would be better for immagration than McCain. I guess they never heard of the McCain Kennedy bill.
I sincerely hope that Texas does seperate from the rest of the US. I think this state is a refuge for common sense thinking and conservative values, I’m not naive enough to think that there are no liberal idiots here because there surely are, but they are enough of a minority that I hope they will leave for either coast if it does happen.
Craig Barton
Arlington, TX
December 8th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
charmedlife-
I think I can tell you how much longer you can sit by and watch: Indefinitely. Action requires more energy and conviction than most people in this country can muster. From school on we are taught to act as a group, or herd. Be it the in group in High School or the designations of Freshman-Senior, we have instilled in us from day one to take no action unless and until someone else tells us to. Most likely, you will wait until someone else takes the initiative to act, then you will follow suit. This country is quickly becoming less of a salad or melting pot, and more of a powder keg. Once the new New Deal that Obama proposes begins, things will most likely reach their peak. All we need is a spark, and you’ll see how fast things change.
December 8th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
I live in Michigan. I see nothing of any great influence coming from Canada. I suppose all the union entitlement people here would disagree with me.
I pray every night that they will let the employers of the union go down in flames so that Michigan can get a huge reality check. I love my state and I want to put an end to the dependence on the auto industry.
I don’t really see us breaking up. We just have to figure out how to get people to realize that nanny government is the problem, not the solution.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Response to charmedlife
I hope you have plenty of Pepcid-AC and Alka Seltzer on hand because I have a feeling the bailouts are going to continue until we experience the painful consequences of a hyperinflationary collapse. You are going to need a strong stomach or a powerful remedy for chronic indigestion.
I agree that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish the government and institute new government. However with the current anti-capitalisitic, nihilistic mentality of most of our citizens I would hate to see what new form of government would be instituted. How do you spell totalitarianism or dictatorship?
I think our only hope is an ideological revolution–one with Libertarian philosophy as its driving force.
December 9th, 2008 at 11:20 am
This “bailout” welfare program for corporations is causing many people to be upset. If 17 to 19 billion will only get GM and company through the spring. Why loan it?
December 9th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Let’s not forget what happened the last time some states decided they didn’t want to be part of the Union. Apparently it hasn’t been a voluntary membership for at least 143 years.
December 9th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Wow R.R., I like the way you think, and the way you express your thoughts!!
December 11th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Response to cbart51.
> The majority of latinos suffer from HIV virus,
What does this assumption have to do with Texas breaking apart from the USA?
Addiction to drugs, and abuse of alcohol have a weight on that possibility as well? In a positive or in a negative way?
BTW, addiction to illegal drugs I understand is higher in an ethnic group other than the Latino one.
HIV and addiction to drugs come both from ignorance, being irresponsable and careless about the own body.
So both social scourges, along with the ehtnic groups they are most related to, should have the same influence on the allegedly independence of Texas.
Still don’t see the relation though.
> latinos that I know voted for Obama in the hopes of free everything.
As I see it, every American that voted for Obama did it because they believe in the handouts, “spread the wealth” and that line of thought.
So any Obama supporter regardless the ethnic group they belong to, somehow likes the idea of a Big Government.
When I saw Obama’s speech on Chicago the night of November 4, among the crowd celebrating his victory I saw more white people -moved to tears- than latino or even black people (which was kind of interesting, by the way.)
I bet all of them have the hopes of free everything as well, just as those Latinos you know.
> they never heard of the McCain Kennedy bill.
I completely agree with you.