• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maybe It's Time To Dissolve the US

Bassman

Bassman

Next we have #12. The Larch
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
3,834
Reaction score
767
Location
West end of the Erie Canal (That's Buffalo, NY for
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
 
I think the vast majority of people actually respect those with different ideologies in the US, and compromise and progress is not just possible, but probable. We have the greatest country in the world to my mind, despite the problems we have, and can't see anything that makes me think any of our problems are unsolvable.
 
Redress said:
I think the vast majority of people actually respect those with different ideologies in the US, and compromise and progress is not just possible, but probable. We have the greatest country in the world to my mind, despite the problems we have, and can't see anything that makes me think any of our problems are unsolvable.
Click to expand...

Not from what I've seen, especially with Liberals and their arrogant, egocentric, and condescending attitudes towards average blokes like me, their disdain towards "flyover" country, and so forth. Not to mention we have a regime that is so hell bent on destroying and reshaping this country I would have no desire to live in. Compromise?? Hah! That's funny. Especially coming from the Left who wish to rub it in!!
 
If we just diminished the role of the president and evaluated the role of the senate, we could operate under federalism.

Want universal health care, go vote for it, want gun rights, go sign that ballot.
 
Bassman said:
Not from what I've seen, especially with Liberals and their arrogant, egocentric, and condescending attitudes towards average blokes like me, their disdain towards "flyover" country, and so forth. Not to mention we have a regime that is so hell bent on destroying and reshaping this country I would have no desire to live in. Compromise?? Hah! That's funny. Especially coming from the Left who wish to rub it in!!
Click to expand...

This attitude is different from conservatives towards liberals and libertarians how?
 
Bassman said:
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
Click to expand...



I have thought this at times myself over the past three decades. The rift in values, norms, expectations of government, and so on between the "red and blue" is a vast chasm.

As a long as a mechanism exists for one side to impose its will on the other nationwide (ie the powerful and dominant central gov't) then this rift will continue to ride the edge of rebellion, as each side takes its turn oppressing the principles of the other. (In a way, it reminds me of England during a certain timeframe; when the King was Catholic, then Protestants were oppressed....when the King was Protestant the Catholics suffered...back and forth...)

If we went back to true Federalism, with the central government chiefly focused on foreign affairs and trade and otherwise weak and small; with states that are largely autonomous and handle most domestic issues interally; you could have real choice and "vote with your feet" for what kind of state you wanted to live in: Right, Left, Middle or California. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Goshin said:
I have thought this at times myself over the past three decades. The rift in values, norms, expectations of government, and so on between the "red and blue" is a vast chasm.

As a long as a mechanism exists for one side to impose its will on the other nationwide (ie the powerful and dominant central gov't) then this rift will continue to ride the edge of rebellion, as each side takes its turn oppressing the principles of the other. (In a way, it reminds me of England during a certain timeframe; when the King was Catholic, then Protestants were oppressed....when the King was Protestant the Catholics suffered...back and forth...)

If we went back to true Federalism, with the central government chiefly focused on foreign affairs and trade and otherwise weak and small; with states that are largely autonomous and handle most domestic issues interally; you could have real choice and "vote with your feet" for what kind of state you wanted to live in: Right, Left, Middle or California. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Ouch! :mrgreen:
 
Goshin said:
If we went back to true Federalism, with the central government chiefly focused on foreign affairs and trade and otherwise weak and small; with states that are largely autonomous and handle most domestic issues interally; you could have real choice and "vote with your feet" for what kind of state you wanted to live in: Right, Left, Middle or California. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I think I could live under a Federalist Government....as long as I was Dictator...
 
Last edited:
The more local the governance the less illegitimate it is, but the only fully legitimate governance is that of an individual over himself and his dependents (i.e. family).

All relationships between human beings should ideally be based on objective economic laws, as determined through natural selection in a system of non-violent competition (AKA cooperation) based on individual self-ownership [FLASH] and polycentric jurisprudence. This naturally leads to a political system known as Anarcho-Capitalism.

Any questions? :cool:
 
Last edited:
Bassman said:
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
Click to expand...

As a "Right -Wing "Extremist",,, kiss my ass.

I'd hope the "Left-wing" Butt-Wipes" would tell you the same.:)

Now's they're chance.:)
 
Bassman said:
Not from what I've seen, especially with Liberals and their arrogant, egocentric, and condescending attitudes towards average blokes like me, their disdain towards "flyover" country, and so forth. Not to mention we have a regime that is so hell bent on destroying and reshaping this country I would have no desire to live in. Compromise?? Hah! That's funny. Especially coming from the Left who wish to rub it in!!
Click to expand...

Interesting you said nothing of this sort when Bush was in office often going to the point of defending policies that Obama is now following (some of which Daewoo give you crap for). And looking at a great many of Obama's policies, they are lock step with Bush sufficiently enough that Obama can be called a Bush Clone. So hence why I ask you why you only say this when Bush III is in office and not when Bush II was.

Are you going to be a hypocrite? Or come clean?
 
Bassman said:
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
Click to expand...

You'll creatures like Redress kissing your butt. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Alex Libman said:
The more local the governance the less illegitimate it is, but the only fully legitimate governance is that of an individual over himself and his dependents (i.e. family).

All relationships between human beings should ideally be based on objective economic laws, as determined through natural selection in a system of non-violent competition (AKA cooperation) based on individual self-ownership [FLASH] and polycentric jurisprudence. This naturally leads to a political system known as Anarcho-Capitalism.

Any questions? :cool:
Click to expand...
Uh huh..... :roll:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
It isn't. His comments were the perfect example of hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Especially considering the other forum he posts on where the hypocrisy is ridiculous. More or less, if the politician has an R after their name, they can do no wrong, but if it's a D, there's hell to pay even when both are doing the same thing. He caught flak over there for the behavior and gladly it looks like he's going to get some here for it.
 
How would you even divide up the states? Every state in the union contains huge amounts of both liberal and conservatives. Presidential races make us think it terms of red and blue states, but that just means 51%+ of the people voted one way, not the whole state. California may be a democratic state, but it still has more Republicans than the majority of red states.
 
How much water would it take to dissolve the US?
 
Bassman said:
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
Click to expand...

jesusland.jpg


LOL. :mrgreen:
 
obvious Child said:
Pretty much. Especially considering the other forum he posts on where the hypocrisy is ridiculous. More or less, if the politician has an R after their name, they can do no wrong, but if it's a D, there's hell to pay even when both are doing the same thing. He caught flak over there for the behavior and gladly it looks like he's going to get some here for it.
Click to expand...


Who cares here what his postings on WS were in here is a totally different site that allows a more free discussion anyway. Is it that you are so bitter that as a far left extremist you couldn't find a niche to freely attack on WS so you think you can do it here? or is it that deep down you have been pawnd so many times for your childish, no, cartoonish attacks that you think that is debate? Either way you are laughed at.

Why not drop the attack style and put forth some actual thought? If you can.


Bassman said:
Folks, with the rift between Liberals and Conservatives far too deep for any reconciliation, I propose the US be dissolved and a two state or regional sub-continent emerge.
Click to expand...

Getting back to the actual question of the thread, I think that is the goal of Obama in the first place. Why should we help him?


j-mac
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
How much water would it take to dissolve the US?
Click to expand...

None, because the United States is a legal fiction, like a corporation, but unlike a corporation it was created without the direct consent of its supposed stakeholders (i.e. "citizens").

The discussions regarding the practical details of its inheritor states, or, better yet, the individuals who are to inherit its assets, might in fact involve water.


danarhea said:
[Jesusland map image]
Click to expand...

That popular and humorous map does not come anywhere close to accurately estimating the geographic patterns where various political philosophies are dominant. The greatest rift is not on the issue of religion, but on more substantive economic issues - capitalism vs socialism, individual rights vs "collective rights", negative rights vs "positive rights", anthropocentricism vs "environmentalism", natalism vs anti-natalism, and so on.

Socialism, collectivism, anti-natalism, and environmentalism tend to be predominant in urban areas. Natalism is predominant in the south, as well as places like Utah. Capitalism exists everywhere to a degree, but is predominant in less religious non-urban areas. Etc.

The most straightforward short-term solution, in addition to greater states' rights, is urban secession: let the top metropolitan areas, in addition to the adjacent densely-populated suburban counties, become separate U.S. states!

In the long term, however - all governments will end up on the dust heap of history, it's just a matter of time!
 
Last edited:
Alex Libman said:
None, because the United States is a legal fiction, like a corporation, but unlike a corporation it was created without the direct consent of its supposed stakeholders (i.e. "citizens").

The discussions regarding the practical details of its inheritor states, or, better yet, the individuals who are to inherit its assets, might in fact involve water.




That popular and humorous map does not come anywhere close to accurately estimating the geographic patterns where various political philosophies are dominant. The greatest rift is not on the issue of religion, but on more substantive economic issues - capitalism vs socialism, individual rights vs "collective rights", negative rights vs "positive rights", anthropocentricism vs "environmentalism", natalism vs anti-natalism, and so on.

Socialism, collectivism, anti-natalism, and environmentalism tend to be predominant in urban areas. Natalism is predominant in the south, as well as places like Utah. Capitalism exists everywhere to a degree, but is predominant in less religious non-urban areas. Etc.

The most straightforward short-term solution, in addition to greater states' rights, is urban secession: let the top metropolitan areas, in addition to the adjacent densely-populated suburban counties, become separate U.S. states!

In the long term, however - all governments will end up on the dust heap of history, it's just a matter of time!
Click to expand...
Probably the most pointless, unstubstantiated and useless statement every made in a political forum.
 
American said:
Probably the most pointless, unstubstantiated and useless statement every made in a political forum.
Click to expand...

I usually rag on you about your one-liners...but this one is right on target.
 
j-mac said:
Who cares here what his postings on WS were in here is a totally different site that allows a more free discussion anyway. Is it that you are so bitter that as a far left extremist you couldn't find a niche to freely attack on WS so you think you can do it here? or is it that deep down you have been pawnd so many times for your childish, no, cartoonish attacks that you think that is debate? Either way you are laughed at.

Why not drop the attack style and put forth some actual thought? If you can.
Click to expand...

I may not always agree with OC, but the thought that he is a far left extremist is preposterous. Only a far right extremist would think so.



Getting back to the actual question of the thread, I think that is the goal of Obama in the first place. Why should we help him?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Seems to me that it is more of the goal of rightwing extremists.

Now that we have dispensed with the partisan hackery, do you have anything of substance to add?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom