Skip to main content

The nation is divided. Many states are against any federal interference in the private lives of individuals. They consider the government an enemy of freedom. Some of their citizens openly call for direct disobedience of federal mandates.
Other states loudly call for increased federal regulation, especially of corporate activities which they claim are eroding the health and safety of the citizens.
Both sides increasingly resort to name-calling, growing ever more poisonous in tone. Large sums of money are being spent by both sides with violene on the increase. Sound familiar? It should. It was like that in 1860.

Everyone knows what happened the next year. The states that disagreed with a federal mandate on slavery decided not to obey the federal government and withdrew from the Union. The federal government refused to allow this to happen and the result was the bloodiest war America has ever fought.

I suggest it may be time to ask: Could it happen again?

Reading letters on the net leaves no doubt that civility, courtesy and comity are things of the past. Respect for the presidency has yielded to insult and vilification. The same is true for those who disagree with the President. The nation is so far from the indivisibility mentioned in the Pledge of Allegience that we have become two nations:"us"and "them."
So is there a possibilty that the Tea Party states would simply refuse to obey federal mandates on, say, heath care and dare the feds to make them? And would the Obama administration behave the same as the Lincoln administration and send troops?

Now I realize there are probably those on both sides who would say, "Bring it on." With the country in its present state, there's not much hope for the two sides to reach any agreement. Listen to Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan on one side and Barney Frank or Nancy Pelosi on the other and try to find a middle ground. Throw in the fundamentalist Christians who think Mr. Obama is the Antichrist and the Occupy bunch who believe corporations are the worst enemy of America since Stalin and the outlook becomes even bleaker.

So, if Mr. Obama wins the White House, the Democrats take over the Congress and they ram through a health care mandate, higher taxes on the wealthy and more benefits for the unions, just suppose Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Mississippi, Alabama and a few other states refuse to participate? Would Mr. Obama be like Mr. Lincoln? If the dissenting states decided to form a Union of their own, would the federal government let them do it, or would they send troops?

If those who don't learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them, what do you think the future holds?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Throw The Bums Out

    If the government is for sale, why not blame the buyers?

    by boguseconomist on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:05:58 PM PDT

  •  Is this a trick question? (5+ / 0-)


    A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

    by Pluto on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:22:41 PM PDT

    •  That war never ended, in any event. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy

      This map looks like it would make for a happier North America, IMO. People have the right to be governed the way their hearts tell them is the right way -- rather than 50 percent of the people hating and enraged by the other 50 percent. That seems wrong to me.

      I ask if it is a trick question because I do not believe it is permitted to discuss such matters here.


      A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

      by Pluto on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:54:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The assumption you have is that its 50/50 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib

        Thats not the case.  Those who don't vote your assuming they would get swept up in this and go which ever way the map dictates and that would be a huge assumption.  The actual conservative population is probably around 35%.  Successionist here in Texas keep trying to push but never get more then 10% of the vote.

        Plus I don't believe Maryland, Virginia, New Mexico, Florida, North or South Carolina would go.  Demographics are completely different then 100 years ago.  Lots of false equavalincies in your diary.

        If at first you don't succeed, vote Teapublicans out and try again. You have to be persistent if you want anything out of life.

        by Final Frame on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:23:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You may be right about the percentages (0+ / 0-)

          But the overall demographics and stats -- to this day -- are overwhelmingly precise when looking at maps.


          A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

          by Pluto on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 11:27:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What demographics and stats (0+ / 0-)

            Did you look up?  You can give me basic statements all day long but that still doesn't back up your original theory.  Even in states where they have voted to leave the union the voting has been a very small percentage of the overall population.  All you have to do is look at Hawaii, Texas, and Alaska who do have groups trying to persuade others to do so.  Even back when Texas initally left the union during the civil war it was voted on by mostly white male land owners.  Women, African Americans, Hispanics didn't have the right to vote and so weren't given a voice.

            You have to have some kind of evidence to use before you can apply it to a broader area.  Kinda like how polling works.  What it sounds like is your stereotyping and thats not accurate.

            If at first you don't succeed, vote Teapublicans out and try again. You have to be persistent if you want anything out of life.

            by Final Frame on Sun Sep 09, 2012 at 08:03:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  While I understand the concern (9+ / 0-)

    the answer is NO.

    Not by a long way ... We are not anywhere near the conditions that might forment civil war, and you need to hope that we never are.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    by twigg on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:33:34 PM PDT

  •  I'd say let 'em go (3+ / 0-)

    But first quickly and quietly remove the federal reserves, the military assets, the federal records... and, of course, cut off federal aid.  

    In the Civil War, the southern states seized all U.S. assets as they seceded and were eager to snatch more out of states that hadn't seceded.  Won't happen again.

    Trade, travel, and immigration treaties would have to be worked out, slowly, though we might have an emergency asylum program for people fearing for their lives in the secessionist states, like LGBT people, racial minorities, members of suddenly persecuted religions, etc.

    The red states are red not only politically - they're in the red fiscally, collecting more in federal moneys than they contribute.  I'm sure they'd impress us and all the world with their free market enterprise once they wean themselves from the billions of blue dollars they suckle from that despicable guvmint teat.

    "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

    by KateCrashes on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:53:51 PM PDT

    •  I've been working on the numbers (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KateCrashes

      ....for quite some time. I believe it would take about five years to do it happily and get everyone resettled. And, of course, the borders would have to remain open for the people.


      A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

      by Pluto on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 07:57:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It would be interesting to see the CSA (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pluto

        trading partners' approach to debt.  

        In the Civil War, the U.S. blockaded southern ports and kept the pressure on England and others used to buying southern cotton, etc., not to trade.

        In a peaceful separation, the U.S. wouldn't do that.  But the C.S.A. would be poorer from the get-go, and while China might step up with its seemingly limitless appetite for American debt, the EU and other Asian states might be hella cautious.

        The C.S.A. might also not unite or stay united.  The factionalism before was intense and if the Union army not been an inspiration, a Balkans-style situation might have evolved pretty quickly.

        "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

        by KateCrashes on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:13:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The US is facing balkanization anyway. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KateCrashes

          Or, regionalism, if you wish. Not for ideological purposes but because of both environmental limitations and fundamental economic flaws. We cannot afford our own infrastructure. There are dozens of proposed division maps like these floating around. Foreign investors are already staking regional positions.


          A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. -- Groucho Marx

          by Pluto on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:34:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sure, but the South's issues were more granular (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Pluto

            Intolerance, rivalry, envy, and greed among the leaderships, state by state, were awesome and the state governments were hotly repressive toward county governments that thought the philosophies espoused by secessionists meant they, too, could run things like they wanted.  

            Even now, the south of Florida and the north of Florida would like to get rid of each other (with the north keeping the south's money, of course), so the north might find it fabulous to make allies of Georgia and Alabama and get aggressive.  Family ties make it likely that New Jersey and downstate New York would find ways of helping south Florida in its struggles to be free as would exiled Cubans the world over.  Lively times.

            Oklahoma would benefit hugely from Mississippi or Gulf access, but would be afraid to take Texas on.  Why not make an ally of Texas and share the spoils of Arkansas?  Well, Texas would be crazy busy setting up treaties with Mexico and arming that border, but still, I'm sure the CSA media would be filled with the ravings from Col. O'Reilly and Col. Limbaugh and Col. Beck about the Clintons scheming up an insurrection in Little Rock.  Houston men, march north!

            The Citadel won't be able to turn 'em out fast enough, I'm telling ya.

            "Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison

            by KateCrashes on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:55:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Are you being serious? (0+ / 0-)

            This is ridiculous. Also, why isn't it a Conspiracy Theory?

    •  KateC - there is no consensus to leave the union (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grover, Sparhawk, ranger995, Charles Hall

      If you were to have a vote in the old Confederate States to leave the US I doubt 20% of the people would vote in favor. There is no political will for the South to leave the Union. This diary is nonsense.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:41:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This diary sort of reads like a threat. (6+ / 0-)

    If you have been paying attention the last 30 years, the Democrats have never rammed a thing through congress.

    The mandate was already passed, and yet no civil war, amazing isn't it.

    "If you don't sin, then Jesus died for nothing!" (on a sign at a Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans)

    by ranger995 on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:11:12 PM PDT

    •  Respectful disagreement (0+ / 0-)

      I appalud Ranger for his/her loyalty to the Democrats, but to say they are innocent in the ramming department is folly. Using the Roosevelt model, trying to juggle every advantage to get one's point across is a universal given in American politics, whether Democrat or Republican. To say that one side or another "never" rammed anything through Congress is to ignore every bill passed when Democrats held absolute majorities in both houses.

      If the government is for sale, why not blame the buyers?

      by boguseconomist on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 12:25:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've got a real problem with false equivalency (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grover, vacantlook, The Swimmer, ranger995

    so you lost me right about here:

    Throw in the fundamentalist Christians who think Mr. Obama is the Antichrist and the Occupy bunch who believe corporations are the worst enemy of America since Stalin

    It is time to #Occupy Media.

    by lunachickie on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 08:12:46 PM PDT

    •  This. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ranger995

      How many fundies and birthers were invited to, hold places of honor and gave speeches at the RNC ?

      And the Occupy folks at the DNC?  

      Exactly.

      Bad faith narratives are just that. We need to label them and treat those that make them accordingly.

      © grover


      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Sat Sep 08, 2012 at 09:04:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Equivalency (0+ / 0-)

      I'm sorry I didn't make myself clearer. The extremist positions on both sides of the spectrum, plus the unwillingness of either side to modify its position was meant to underline the difficulty of averting the tragedy we once experienced.

      If the government is for sale, why not blame the buyers?

      by boguseconomist on Sun Sep 09, 2012 at 12:06:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Who let the fucking crazy out? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ranger995, S F Hippie

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site