US state secession: are differences irreconcilable?

[Bill Ryan]

This proposal is gaining traction now, especially after the indictment of President Trump a few days ago. It's all about a number of American states seceding from the Union.

Marjorie Taylor Greene was one of the first to use the phrase, back in February. This was published in Newsweek on 20 Feb:

https://newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-wants-nations-divorce-red-blue-states-1782449

Marjorie Taylor Greene Wants 'National Divorce' of Red and Blue States

I'll not copy the article here, but it featured this useful summary tweet:

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status...65203398688768

The slightly curtailed text reads:

We need a national divorce. We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government. Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s traitorous America Last policies, we are done.

[Ernie Nemeth]

If there is such a movement, I hope it will involve its neighbor to the north...Alberta would be happy to join the red states for sure. Eastern Canada might as well. British Columbia, most of Ontario and all of Quebec would likely be lost.
The entire world power structure would change if USA divorced, leaving America as a regional power while China would rise to dominance as the only remaining super-power.
Scary stuff.

Also, Texas has been mulling the idea of leaving the union altogether. That would be a devastating blow to the red states in such a scenario.

[Bill Ryan]

Some more interesting articles to read:

• What Would a National Divorce Look Like?
  https://governing.com/context/what-w...orce-look-like

• Take Threats of ‘National Divorce’ Seriously
  https://nytimes.com/2023/03/05/opini...civil-war.html

• 66 MILLION Americans want a 'national divorce': New poll shows growing number back Marjorie Taylor Greene's call for a split between blue and red states
  https://dailymail.co.uk/news/article...ed-states.html

[JackMcThorn]

This is not a very new, Texas has toyed with the idea since the original civil war 1861 until as recently as the 199os.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_secession_movements

The U.S. Constitution does not specifically address the secession of states, and the issue was a topic of debate after the American Revolutionary War until the Civil War, when the Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that states strictly cannot unilaterally secede except through revolution or the expressed consent of the other states.

What is new is 'getting that consent from other states' and the idea of a divorce rather than another civil war. Seems like america is in shambles; what we used to call a soup sandwich. [a mess]

It would really take a small miracle for 'a national divorce' to actually happen, is my best guess.

[ExomatrixTV]

• source

Arizona may turn red ...

[thepainterdoug]

Bill I have to say from what i see, the differences are irreconcilable and it's quite alarming. How do you get thru to people who are asking ,accusing and saying the same about you?

My son tells me he asks his dem lib friend, what about the border? , drugs, crime, child exploitation the gas prices, inflation etc and he snaps back, well better than if Trump was in office !!. WHAT? TRUMP WAS IN OFFICE AND IT WAS SIMPLY NOT TRUE! It defies all logic and common sense
Its nothing short of infuriating!! There is no making sense of it! LANGUAGE RENDERED MEANINGLESS.

So I dont know what it would look like but short of an "other worldly intervention", its a national divorce or the unthinkable, neighbors bearing arms and shooting it out
Completely bizarre.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)
Bill I have to say from what i see, the differences are irreconcilable and it's quite alarming.

Yes, I'm not an American, but it seems as plain as day that the Great Divide is now impossible to repair. One half is being demonized (rightly or wrongly) by the other, on a 24/7 basis with no end in sight.

Chris Martenson did a livestream about this just yesterday. His livestreams are often chaotic and not always worth watching, but near the end of this video he presents this grid, which are counselor John Gottman's four sets of criteria for evaluating whether a marriage can be saved.




Gottman insists that the presence of contempt is the most important factor. (Examples of contempt: Disrespect, Mockery/sarcasm, Insulting, and Eye-rolling/scoffing.)

A marriage is irreconcilable, he states, when mutual contempt is ever-present. The reason for this is that constructive dialog is simply no longer possible.

If we apply this to the US political landscape — it's over.

[T Smith]

Posted by thepainterdoug (here)

My son tells me he asks his dem lib friend, what about the border? , drugs, crime, child exploitation the gas prices, inflation etc and he snaps back, well better than if Trump was in office !!. WHAT?

That's the program speaking. Trump Derangement Syndrome. Of course we all know this, but consider this--which I've actually said to people like your son's friend:

[INPUT] What about the very real possibility of nuclear war and NYC and everyone you love incinerating?

[OUTPUT] well better than if Trump was in office !!

I am continually amazed by just how powerful and controlling the program is

[ExomatrixTV]

• The Tunnel Vision Tribalism of the Democrats are literary on a different level ... deliberately abandoning all common sense!

Sure, there is also tribalism with Republicans, but to what degree and how myopic? ... and those who claim "it is all the same" haven't studied the "group psychology" of democrats deeply enough.

ps. Am Dutch 🇳🇱 (can not vote in the USA) was a long time classic liberal, upholding basic principles & common sense that nowadays will be labeled as "far right" which is just a way to censor (shut down) critical thinking by the alt-left who hijacked the party with lots of help from WEF minions.

• There are also WEF tentacles within the "Deep State" part of the Republican Party who are "Never Trumpers" also known as "Rino's" & "Neo-Cons" betraying the party from within.

cheers,
John 🦜🦋🌳

[shaberon]

Posted by JackMcThorn (here)
This is not a very new, Texas has toyed with the idea since the original civil war 1861 until as recently as the 199os.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_secession_movements

The U.S. Constitution does not specifically address the secession of states, and the issue was a topic of debate after the American Revolutionary War until the Civil War, when the Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that states strictly cannot unilaterally secede except through revolution or the expressed consent of the other states.

What is new is 'getting that consent from other states' and the idea of a divorce rather than another civil war. Seems like america is in shambles; what we used to call a soup sandwich. [a mess]

It would really take a small miracle for 'a national divorce' to actually happen, is my best guess.

The thing is, that around here, particularly in states that were defeated by the Union Army, we were co-erced to add to our State Constitutions a clause that says "we will not secede". Texas does not have such a clause. I am not sure how widespread it is. But for example I am pretty sure that in Georgia you can't just go through with it. In most states to forcefully pass an Amendment you have to get 2/3 of the popular vote. It could actually be done, but it would work a lot differently in different places.

Something like that is fine with me, carve it up.

[mijatoca]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
This proposal is gaining traction now, especially after the indictment of President Trump a few days ago. It's all about a number of American states seceding from the Union.

Marjorie Taylor Greene was one of the first to use the phrase, back in February. This was published in Newsweek on 20 Feb:

https://newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-wants-nations-divorce-red-blue-states-1782449

Marjorie Taylor Greene Wants 'National Divorce' of Red and Blue States

I'll not copy the article here, but it featured this useful summary tweet:

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status...65203398688768

The slightly curtailed text reads:

We need a national divorce. We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government. Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s traitorous America Last policies, we are done.

Bill, I don't read all your posts (no offence) , and correct me if my characterization of you is inaccurate, but you seem like you have devolved into a QANON cultist. You appear to promote GOP Lunatics. MTG?

OK let's extrapolate things if what she (MTG) proposes, takes shape.
1 country will be thrilled of guns in public like an episode of Gunsmoke, The Christian Taliban rules, Federal dollars become non existant anymore for those states that took more than contributed, talent exits because this bs isn't what they bargained for. Looks a lot more like (in my opinion) the Middle East now.

The other country attracts sensibility or at least a discussion based on facts.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by mijatoca (here)

Bill, I don't read all your posts (no offence) , and correct me if my characterization of you is inaccurate, but you seem like you have devolved into a QANON cultist.

Yes, I can correct you. You're absolutely wrong.

I've never once supported (or even been interested in) QAnon. As I posted several times a while back, the QAnon messages changed authorship as many as 5 or 6 times even in the first year as the initiators lost control over the entire thing.

I'm no MAGA hothead. The world would be a better (and safer, fairer, more equitable) place if the entire USA fell to its global knees. The US is no longer the leader of the Free World.

Regarding my personal principles, I posted this here a few days ago. As a thought experiment, I'd defy anyone to try to place me personally on any Left—Right spectrum. I'm:

• pro-environment
• anti-imperialism
• anti-war (yes, really; but war is sometimes necessary as a last resort when the weak and corrupt global legal system fails)
• anti-greed
• pro-Christian (although I'm not a Christian myself; I'm more of a Buddhist)
• anti-capitalism
• pro-family
• pro-education
• pro-tradition
• pro-national culture
• pro-health sovereignty
• anti-recreational drugs
• pro-equality of opportunity
• anti-personal surveillance
• anti-big business
• anti-big pharma
• anti-big banking
• anti-big agro
• anti-globalisation
• anti-hunting for sport
• anti-censorship... etc etc etc.

Posted by mijatoca (here)

1 country will be thrilled of guns in public like an episode of Gunsmoke, The Christian Taliban rules, Federal dollars become non existant anymore for those states that took more than contributed, talent exits because this bs isn't what they bargained for. Looks a lot more like (in my opinion) the Middle East now.

The other country attracts sensibility or at least a discussion based on facts.

That's why some people are discussing a 'National Divorce'. You have perfectly represented why no meaningful dialog is possible.

[arwen]

This is a discussion for Americans for sure.

Mike Adams explores the idea further in 15 minutes, explaining what the irreconcilable differences are, and exploring what a national divorce would look like:


Source: https://www.bitchute.com/video/bmCkgAiUawla/

[mijatoca]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by mijatoca (here)

Bill, I don't read all your posts (no offence) , and correct me if my characterization of you is inaccurate, but you seem like you have devolved into a QANON cultist.

Yes, I can correct you. You're absolutely wrong.

I've never once supported (or even been interested in) QAnon. As I posted several times a while back, the QAnon messages changed authorship as many as 5 or 6 times even in the first year as the initiators lost control over the entire thing.

I'm no MAGA hothead. The world would be a better (and safer, fairer, more equitable) place if the entire USA fell to its global knees. The US is no longer the leader of the Free World.

Regarding my personal principles, I posted this here a few days ago. As a thought experiment, I'd defy anyone to try to place me personally on any Left—Right spectrum. I'm:

• pro-environment
• anti-imperialism
• anti-war (yes, really; but war is sometimes necessary as a last resort when the weak and corrupt global legal system fails)
• anti-greed
• pro-Christian (although I'm not a Christian myself; I'm more of a Buddhist)
• anti-capitalism
• pro-family
• pro-education
• pro-tradition
• pro-national culture
• pro-health sovereignty
• anti-recreational drugs
• pro-equality of opportunity
• anti-personal surveillance
• anti-big business
• anti-big pharma
• anti-big banking
• anti-big agro
• anti-globalisation
• anti-hunting for sport
• anti-censorship... etc etc etc.

Posted by mijatoca (here)

1 country will be thrilled of guns in public like an episode of Gunsmoke, The Christian Taliban rules, Federal dollars become non existant anymore for those states that took more than contributed, talent exits because this bs isn't what they bargained for. Looks a lot more like (in my opinion) the Middle East now.

The other country attracts sensibility or at least a discussion based on facts.

That's why some people are discussing a 'National Divorce'. You have perfectly represented why no meaningful dialog is possible.

Sorry Bill, that doesn't wash. You are promoting views of an idiot and liar. Don't backtrack. Why not promote someone of intellect?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by mijatoca (here)
Why not promote someone of intellect?

You mean like Joe Biden?

There are very few politicians of intellect anywhere. However, this is one:

• Мое сообщение для всех вас

[arwen]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by mijatoca (here)
Why not promote someone of intellect?

You mean like Joe Biden?

There are very few politicians of intellect anywhere. However, this is one:

• Мое сообщение для всех вас

I missed that! Epic troll!

[mijatoca]

I agree Bill. They are very few. But there are.

[mijatoca]

Ever hear Madeleine Albright (Secretary of State under Bill Clinton. and btw he is a class A felon). She talks without pause for thought collection. Her brain is like an AI. Very impressive to watch.

[T Smith]

Posted by mijatoca (here)
Bill, I don't read all your posts (no offence) , and correct me if my characterization of you is inaccurate, but you seem like you have devolved into a QANON cultist. You appear to promote GOP Lunatics. MTG?

OK let's extrapolate things if what she (MTG) proposes, takes shape.
1 country will be thrilled of guns in public like an episode of Gunsmoke, The Christian Taliban rules, Federal dollars become non existant anymore for those states that took more than contributed, talent exits because this bs isn't what they bargained for. Looks a lot more like (in my opinion) the Middle East now.

The other country attracts sensibility or at least a discussion based on facts.

Posted by mijatoca (here)
Sorry Bill, that doesn't wash. You are promoting views of an idiot and liar. Don't backtrack. Why not promote someone of intellect?

The sentiment of these posts perfectly exemplifies—and supports—the premise of this thread. This is 100% what it’s all about.

Mijatoca, may I inquire if you are aware that you have, though your sentiments, either inadvertently or otherwise, reduced over 100 million people in America (perhaps more) to cultists and GOP lunatics, many of whom have never even heard of QAnon or are even registered GOP party members? In your view, then, are all these millions and millions of Americans but insane idiots and liars who need be dismissed entirely, with views irreconcilable with your own?

Sounds exactly like the topic of this thread.

Also, I would point out to you, while I have no idea how Bill Ryan feels about MTG’s politics personally (although many of his bullet points suggests he may align with some of her views, but not all), nothing in his post suggests to me he is “promoting” her. It appears to me he is merely (and aptly) observing and reporting on an alarming dynamic of public sentiment, represented by an elected representative of people—real people—in the State of Georgia. But if merely acknowledging the problem (or the wretched person espousing the problem) equates to promoting it—or going further, casting contempt and aspersions on the messenger of the problem—I assume your position may be to ignore and dismiss? As if “those people”—literally half the country or more—don’t exist? Or, at most, if they do exist, hold them in utter contempt and dismiss them as lunatics?

How you answer these questions will illustrate to me whether the issue at hand constitutes irreconcilable differences.

[Ewan]

Posted by mijatoca (here)

Sorry Bill, that doesn't wash. You are promoting views of an idiot and liar. Don't backtrack. Why not promote someone of intellect?

Bill is perfectly capable of speaking for himself but sharing information pertinent to the thread does not equate to supporting (or promoting) that information. It simply means it was relevant.