Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cadeho

End of the US in 2010?

12 posts in this topic

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this in another thread. A professor in Russia who predicted the fall of the Soviet Union is saying the US would break apart into six territories that would be influenced by some other country. Reading his thoughts, I don't think he knows Americans that well. I don't think this Union would have a second civil war and if we did break apart, wouldn't we be 50 independent nations? Hmm... the professor also doesn't mention our territories. I guess he doesn't know about Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa etc. What do you think? I saw it on CNN on New Years Day but I can't find an article there. http://www.domain-b.com/economy/worldecono...or_panarin.html

P1-AO116_RUSPRO_NS_20081228191715.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Once a decade or so something like this pops us, and then goes away, it's always good for a laugh. There are always varible rationales wrapped around it. I think this is the first time vodka might be part of the rationale.

I don't recall the gentleman's name, nor the name of his book, but in the late 80s (I belive) a US geographer made the rhetorical argument that the individual states had become somewhat obselete, and that the US should voluntarily reconfigure itself internally into 8 or 12 new 'states' that would correspond a bit more rationally to cultural, economic and economic pattern that actually exist: Appalachia would be a state, New England, the Pacific Coast states, the Great Lakes, the SE Coastal states, the Mid Atlantic, the upper Midwest/N Plains, Texas, Deep South, Rockies, et. al. It was a cool bit of speculation, a discussion starter that eventually went away.

The map proposed by the Russian seems to be a less broken up version of the same thing. He seems to add the novel ideas of returning Texas and Alaska to Mexico and Russia, along with the even more novel concept of Hawaii going to an Asian nation instead of regaining its' independence.

Seeing Salt Lake City turn Chinese, Wichita turn Canadian, Atlanta turn Mexican, whilst the capital of the Confederacy runs off and joins the EU would be quite a work of performance art, for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more of a good laugh than anything. For one thing, Americans may be divided on some issues, but when a crisis emerges, we have a history of uniting (civil war being the only real exception thus far) and we are a very nationalistic people from coast to coast, so such a breakup wouldn't happen that easily, or that soon. We are in 2009 for crying out loud, that means we would go from a country that is healing its divisions to one that is severely divided in a year, which is highly doubtful! Secondly, Regardless of whether the countries are pro or anti-US, a breakup of the US would be catastrophic for the world, given its large influence and economy (one needs only to look at what the financial crisis here has caused world-wide) and US allies would likely step in rapidly to keep things together with diplomacy or otherwise. Third thing, I doubt that other countries would actually have that much influence or have an outright takeover, with the interest in keeping the US together (especially Canada, Mexico who has a hard enough time controlling what territory it has and the people of this area would certainly fight against joining with them, and China is extremely image-conscious and would not want to be seen as having an interest in owning a piece of the US) and not wanting blood on their hands. Another thing is the states are financially better off staying together than being divided, so none of them would likely try to break away on their own. There are far more benefits to staying together than there are being divided.

All in all, an amusing map by some crazy out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy is probably upset because the thought the Soviet Union would never break up. Psychologists call it displacement, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly couldn't imagine the lines being drawn like that too. Georgia and South Carolina in two different countries? Kentucky and Tennessee joining with New England?

Suppose the United States government collapsed due to its insane spending and reckless behavior and overthrow from people sick of tyranny (not out of the realm of possibility, but it would take a TON to get to this point), I would just assume that the United States is replaced with some other type of government and currency system... similar to what happened in 1787 when the Articles of Confederation were replaced with the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this a few days ago. It's not going to happen. However what should be alarming to Americans are the viewpoints that have formed about the United States during the Bush years which has created a huge market there for this type of thing. Anti-Americanism in the Russian Federation is higher than it ever was during the Soviet years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this quite humourous. While it is true, anti-American sentiment is at an all time high in Russia, things would have to be quite desparate for our country to break apart. I would believe in a collapse of our goverment and a re-org first before the disbanding of our country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can always dream, right? :)

While I have often thought the US certainly exhibited a number of characteristics of deeply divided values and beliefs, this seems far more stereotype than anything else. Texas going to Mexico? I could see Texas making a shot at taking over Mexico, but no, they would not join. And I certainly would not see the Mid-Atlantic states wanting to have anything to do with the European union.

But what is very interesting to me is how someone from a country like Russia views the US. For instance what connection, besides history and proximity, would there be between Alaska and Russia? For that matter, Arizona and Nevada are not what we would consider particularly influenced by Asia, and yet to them that is where they thought it would go. And they lump all of the east coast with Europe instead of South America and in fact the Deep South more with Mexico than anything else. Very interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


They are looking this from eyes that saw the Soviet Union split up in the 1990s and the split portions of it aligning themselves with the surrounding governments. The most interesting are the western European portions of the old CCCP placing applications to become members of the EU. There have been similar shifts by other split off portions based on the geography, history and religion. It has not been missed by them such things as the Ukraine becoming very pro-USA and wanting to join Nato.

The collapse of the Soviet Union was caused by the complete collapse of the economy there. The economy is collapsing in the USA so I can see where this idea might get traction. To them this makes logical sense. Let's also keep in mind this already happened in the United States when the Southern states abandoned the Union to form the Confederacy. And even more interesting this collection of states did align itself with Europe (as much as it could) because it needed access to Europe's industrial base, and Europe wanted access to the resources. It took a war to force these states back into the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe (if I remeber my history correctly) that the French and English used the Civil War as kind of a proxy war between the two countries. Interesting concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's also keep in mind this already happened in the United States when the Southern states abandoned the Union to form the Confederacy. And even more interesting this collection of states did align itself with Europe (as much as it could) because it needed access to Europe's industrial base, and Europe wanted access to the resources. It took a war to force these states back into the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple. Primary value system.

the North East, and parts of the Mid West, see the United States as primarily a stronger government protecting personal freedom and promoting an open market and diversity. The primary values here are the freedoms granted in the constitution. The north east is actually fairly conservative from a personal viewpoint (thus you have states like Massachusetts which still has lots of blue laws and very restrictive laws on things such as alcohol, etc.), but from a policy standpoint they are very cognizant not to bring those into the laws, so you have for instance Gay Marriage. The South West and Texas, on the other hand, view freedom as meaning "Leave me a lone to do what I want to do". To them the government should be light and only there as a defensive strategy to level the playing field.

This comes from how the US developed - the East Coast originated earlier - by social groups that were usually the minority or outsiders. They were in fact the different rights movements of their days - they still had a strong society base, but recognized that not everyone thought the same way. The west developed as individualists moved westward, looking for both self gain as well as to be further away from the denser east coast culture. Individualism became a driving force and cause for them. Any government at all was to them restrictive, and should be kept in check.

So what this means is that we are a country with two driving belief systems and directions. What is happening is that instead of trying to find common ground, we are putting more and more value in standing up for what you believe in. In the end this causes an adversarial situation, and the two different systems create a lot of strife over how government should operate, what rights and freedoms should be set forth by government, and how the government should act on the commercial sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.