So, USA has been partitioned on ideological grounds into four separate countries. People of various ideologies now have to move to the country of their ideological choosing. How would you rate their desirability? LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE COUNTRY Population are usually white Liberals, Asians, blacks and mestizos. This country is at least nominally tolerant and socially liberal in many areas - things like abortion, gay marriage or even some soft drugs are allowed. It has a developed welfare system and a health care system close to it being socialized. It is very politically correct and strives for minority rights and women's rights, as well as social justice. You are much less likely to be picked for being a minority or a woman here. It doesn't want to get involved in most wars but isn't strictly neutral as well. It has a policy some would call anti-gun, claiming this increases safety. It invests a lot in public education. It has extremely high taxes and a lot of corruption. There is no racial cohesion and it accepts masses of illegal immigrants. It's not completely free on social issues and still bans prostitution or harder drugs. Its stifling political correctness means you're constantly policed in that way. President: Barack Obama LIBERTARIAN COUNTRY Populations are white libertarians, Asians, some blacks and mestizos. A lot of freedom here. Almost all drugs are allowed, income tax is either extremely low or there is no income tax (it is funded by import/excise tax and capitol gains tax), businesses can start very easily and government is limited to police force, courts and some basic administration. It is very easy to get a job but also easy to be fired. Abortion and gay marriage are allowed. There is no stifling political correctness but people seem quite tolerant, though it seems that most prosperous group here are whites. You can buy any almost any type of a weapon here aside from the most dangerous ones without any problem. There is pretty much nothing that is socialized here. Strictly neutral and against any foreign interventions. It's neither progressive or feminist nor conservative and seemingly anti-women. There is practically no social safety net here. Personal responsibility at time means that one is left to fend for their own in times of trouble. Some will consider the economic and social freedoms here excessive. Its strict neutrality is something many would find dangerous. President: Ron Paul, succeeded by Gary Johnson MODERATE COUNTRY This country presents what many who don't live in America and don't know it enough present as an "ideal America". Moderate taxes, moderate government, government still getting out the way in some areas. Women have a lot of rights but there are no extremely aggressive feminist policies. Population is mixed but whites prevail by a moderate margin. There is some social safety net but people are mostly encouraged to fight for themselves. It would intervene militarily in some cases. To some it resembles a picture of moderate parts of America from around 1950-1975. Maybe even some remaining saner parts of America today. Could such a country even exist anymore? Has US lost the people for it? President: Jon Hunstman RIGHT WING COUNTRY Population are mostly WASP but there are some white Catholics as well. Almost all are whites, but there are others as well. Economy is a lot less regulated than in a liberal country and somewhat less than in a moderate country but more than in a libertarian country - still, it is quite free-market. Least socially free of these - abortion is made very complicated to obtain, all drugs are illegal and marriage is strictly between a man and a woman. Family values are much appreciated and there is no political correctness at all. It is quite easy to obtain guns. Allocates a lot of resources for defense and will make foreign interventions. Races other than whites seem disliked here. Many won't like it's social conservatism and will claim its against women. There is considerable corruption and governments often act in the interest of big business. It's gun-ho foreign policy can make it a target of terrorist attacks. President: Rick Santorum
How about this, if we lose the war? Population are mostly white, with all having converted to Islam at the tip of a sword. Economy based on strict Islamic law, so there is no such thing as interest rates and stock markets. All drugs are illegal and marriage is strictly between a man and a woman. Family values are much appreciated and there is no political correctness at all. It is quite easy to obtain guns. Allocates a lot of resources for defense and will make foreign interventions. Faiths other than Islam are executed here. Many won't like it's social conservatism and will claim its against women. There is considerable corruption and governments often act in the interest of the Caliph. It's gun-ho foreign policy can make it a target of attacks by Christian countries. President: Rick Ali Husein Ul-Haq Santorum
I've changed my mind. Let's have a trial run. Let's set up border security for the California border with the U.S. Let's set them off from the United States for a decade or so and see how it goes. The grandchildren of the armed thugs that tried to keep Okies out of California in the 1930s could be employed keeping Californians from spreading to Oklahoma. And, when you look at the migration of people between states you get an idea of how it would go anyway. Here's an interesting map to play with: http://vizynary.com/2013/11/18/restless-america-state-to-state-migration-in-2012/ How are California, New York, and Illinois doing. Keep in mind that raw numbers can be skewed simply by inviting a huge number of undocumented Democrats to enter the country and then settle them in states and cities being abandoned.
