(February 23, 2023 at 8:44 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The difference here being that this is not an issue of discovering new natural resources, but ones already well developed and necessary..yes..even to blue states, actually, especially to blue states. Even back when appalachian coal, for example, was being discovered and first developed..it wasn't for the benefit of the people of appalachia, it was for the benefit of coal hungry coastal cities..where newspapers owned by coal barons and aligned with their interests created the stereotype of rural americans still widely employed today to drive a wedge between the two demos. Ultimately, the nuts talk about a national divorce because it gives them more leverage over -the blue states-. The red ones are already bagged up. You don't want to have to negotiate with yall qaeda to secure domestic resources (or human rights) over internal borders....and, fwiw, you probably don't want to be the person consigning all of the newly minted prisoners of their majesty to a fate you would not accept for yourself.
There are certainly troubling consequences for notions like self determination in deciding that the us either lives together or dies apart - but we already answered them with a civil war and we've done absolutely nothing since then to make any split more tenable today. We're all stuck on the boat with the lunatics, and if we're seriously considering sawing off a part of the boat to solve that problem, there's a simpler and at least equally unethical alternative. There are prison camps all over this country. We have a huge military. It's a funhouse mirror view of the world, I think, to imagine that giving people over to yall qaeda is somehow better than dealing with them like the terrorists they are.
As I said the whole resources situation makes it even easier. Who are the red states with all these resources going to sell to if not their neighbours, who probably would own the companies doing the extracting anyway.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home