Let’s say America is split into a conservative America and a liberal America. The idea being that the competing ideologies will have a monopoly in their segregated zones and this will lead to the freedoms that each desire. The reality. There is no shortage of disagreement within the left and the right. This immediately will make partisan unity problematic. There would likely be a dominant group in each movement which will then attempt to suppress the minority much in the same way as the left and right do today. There will be litmus and purity tests to prove one devotion to the cause, much as is already seen in partisan politics. Segregation will not change this aspect of human nature, instead it will be conservatives attacking the less conservative and liberals attacking the less liberal. The fatal flaw of democracy. Over time the divergence of society we see today is doomed to be repeated in a segregated liberal or conservative society. Initially segregation may act like a reset button making the segregated society more ideologically homogeneous, but over time from one generation to the next, ideological dissent will rear its ugly head. In the segregated liberal sector conservatism will rise and in the segregated conservative sector liberalism will rise. Democracy and republicanism breed variety through its foundation of freedoms. To bar liberalism in the conservative sector or to bar conservatism in the liberal sector is to abandon democracy and republicanism. Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism. The only way to have an ideological homogeneous society is through authoritarianism or totalitarianism. Democracy and republicanism breed ideological variety which is the bane of ideological homogeneity. I posit that the idea of a politically segregated society would be far from of the reality of what it would become. A national divorce is ridiculous and doomed to failure. We either set aside our petty and often biased arguments and learn to work together or face the fact that a free society is doomed to devolve into dysfunction at best. We all play a part in the success or failure of our democracy or more specifically representative republic. Reorganizing into ideologically segregated zones is a fool’s errand. The fact that some of our leaders support a National divorce shows the low quality and lack of responsible leadership this country sorely needs.
1776 - "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." 2023 - When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. Some things remain the same.... like freedom.
lol…all the bigots and racists said the same thing in 1861 when they wanted to destroy the US in order to maintain their degenerate lifestyle on the backs of slaves. Now they want to finish the job in order to pander to the worst elements in society.
Is there an example of an ideologically homogeneous Nation that is a democracy or a representative republic? Perhaps there is, but I know of none unless you include the ironically named Democratic People's Republic of Korea which is neither democratic nor a republic.
I asked the AI ChatGPT the following question. Is there an example of an ideologically homogeneous Nation that is a democracy or a representative republic? The following is it’s answer, and I must say it kinda feels weird quoting an AI but it gave a surprisingly good answer. “It is difficult to find an example of an ideologically homogeneous nation that is also a democracy or a representative republic because democracy and representative government are based on the idea that people with diverse opinions and beliefs can come together to make decisions. In a homogeneous nation, where there is a high degree of consensus on political, social, and cultural issues, the need for representative government may be less pressing. However, one example that comes to mind is Iceland. Iceland is a relatively small country with a population of around 360,000 people, and it is known for its high degree of social cohesion and relatively homogeneous culture. Despite this, Iceland is a functioning democracy with a representative government. The country has a unicameral parliamentary system, where members of parliament are elected through proportional representation. Additionally, Iceland has a multi-party system, which means that there is room for diverse political opinions and perspectives within the government. While Iceland is not completely ideologically homogeneous, it is an example of a country with a relatively high degree of social and cultural homogeneity that is still able to function as a democracy.”
This is a very good thought experiment. My take on it: In the conservative part, the extremists would attempt things like getting rid oh Medicare, privatizing SS, get rid of all regulations protecting workers and the environment. In the liberal part, government services would further increase, with increased taxes and more nanny state. Now, after those changes, both conservative and liberal parts would start to realize that the system was actually pretty good before the split. Conservatives will find that they actually quite like the SS system, and liberals will find out that they quite like the free market and capitalism. It's always easy to advocate for extremist policies, when those policies have no chance to be implemented. When they could actually become a reality, many advocates of those policies may get cold feet.
The left's destruction of the 2d amendment and free speech, their war on fossil fuels, their weakening of the military, their endless inflation, their national embarrassment in the Afghanistan Skedaddle, their arming the Taliban, their green BS and forcing us to buy EV's... has nothing to do with racism or slavery. Apples and space shuttles.
I know of none. Perhaps that is why separation is inevitable. As population increases, unity of purpose gets harder and harder. Perhaps as poulation increases, more groups willing to defend (and even fight for) their own beliefs... is simply inevitable. Tyranny is no answer.
the right is just as bad, wanting to force women and girls to have their rapists babies, force religion on people (the rights destruction of the 1st amendment) their war on drugs funds gangs and terrorists
A quick check of history suggests that the present political polarization [Ed.: Enough with the alliteration, dude,] is not more extreme than that which has occurred in the past. The government of the United States of America, a republic form with a number of its officials elected through the votes of some of those living under it, has survived. There is no reason, a priori, to assume that it will not do so this time around. We may see again some rearrangement of the make-up of the voting base of our two major political parties. The southern bloc in particular is up for grabs for whichever party is willing to cater to its fears and prejudices. The same holds true for other blocs. This poor old country mouse has his score card ready. With beer and hot dogs at hand, I look forward to seeing who's in the line-up for the 2024 game. Regards, stay safe 'n well.
I hope you are right, but I'm not so sure. The specific issues involved make the difference. I recently moved to retirement in Texas and Biden's war on the oil industry isn't a philosophical issue. It effects feeding kids and having jobs. Rights guaranteed to us are being threatened... like the 2d Amendment and Freedom of Speech. We're spending billions defending Ukraine's borders while leaving our own wide open. That endangers me, my children and my grandkids. I want security for them. That's a life and death thing, again, its not a philosophical discussion. I spent a career in the Army defending these rights and now I am supposed to just bend the knee? The embarrassing "Biden Skedaddle" from Afghanistan emboldened Putin to attack Ukraine. Arming the Taliban seemed not to matter to our federal government. Arming terrorists threatens us all. The future is not as certain in my view as it is in yours, but I guess we'll just have to see what the future holds. I'm too old now to do much but watch. But if uncoupling from the federal sinking ship comes up for a vote, I will have some serious contemplation to do before voting.
At least in 1861, if they had won, they would have been an economic powerhouse with all of the free slave labor they would have had. Today, if they won, they would be living in third world countries.
Today, if the South had won, they'd have an industrial base bigger than the north. The North has Wall Street but US Steel is gone from Pittsburgh... the South has most of NASA, L-3, Texas Instruments, Bell Helicopters, Lockheed, Martin-Marietta (Lockheed-Martin now), Knight's Armaments (Largest manufacturer of Special Operations Weapons), The North is mainly a service economy... they don't actually produce much. The South is high tech and makes stuff... from aircraft to food. And most of the Army is in the South too. gatting better every day as affluent folks flee the North for Texas and Florida.
No where in the written, or unwritten rules does it say that everyone has to agree. I wish everyone would stop getting so wrapped around the axle about "uniting" the country. We don't all agree, we will never all agree, nor should we. That's what democracy is all about. In any democratic system, there will be opposing points of view.
