Since lobbing my handgrenade in the previous post, and reading the commentary, I have decided to return to the subject of the possible break-up of the USA. But let me begin by making some things very clear. My knowledge of America has grown enormously since the invention of this 'internet-thingie'. Up to ten years ago my main source of information was printed copies of The American Spectator which arrived once a month, the rest of the media being quite beyond my reach. But now I can not only read and watch the main media, I can also, if so minded, follow the regional news. Needless to say, all this detail has produced considerable, er, 'shock 'n' awe' in me which would not be the case to ordinary Americans who have lived their lives there and who take matters more for granted. In other words, there is a tendency for a 'newcomer' like me to behave like a Bateman cartoon character and repeat endlessly, "I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!"
For example, I really am shocked at the path followed by Obama and the Democrat party. It is only necessary to contrast and compare the ideological fervour driving the party today with the easy-going pragmatism of Bill Clinton t0 see the huge difference in the political zeitgeist. Today the spirit of Saul Alinsky rules in almost every area of American public life including, or perhaps I should say, especially, in the media which no longer even pretends to some sort of detachment. (As I write that, however, I am reminded that back in the '40s and '50s the media were equally virulent against any politician deemed to be soft on communism, so what goes around, comes around!) Even so, the first requirement for any civil unrest is sustained political pressure in one direction and the Obama administration is certainly providing that, and should he be replaced by another Marxist ideologue that could result in sixteen years of relentless growth in Federal power reaching into every part of American life.
The second requirement, and as I have written here before, it is one that is eagerly sought by the Alinsky-ites within the Democrat party, is a catastrophic emergency. As political cynics have said through the ages, no emergency should ever be wasted! Again, as I have written here before, and others far more knowledgeable have repeated endlessly, the USA is heading towards a financial crisis of epic proportions. At the end of the Obama regime the country will owe $20 trillion. The dollar will have ceased to be the world's reserve currency and so it will be left to sink or swim on its own - it will sink! That will cause economic convulsions around the world so if Americans think they will be able to export their goods cheaply they are mistaken because no-one will be buying anything! In fact, Americans will feel austerity as they have never felt it in 75 years. It will be worse, far worse, than the 1930s because ordinary people then did not have that much, but today most Americans are wealthy beyond the dreams of their grand-parents and when you lose what you have always considerd to be yours by right, the shock is immense.
After the cataclysm of WWI, Wilson took advantage of the times and pressed through with his socialist agenda. In the depression of the 1930s, Roosevelt followed his lead. In the coming disaster in this century an ideologically committed president will try to ram through even more extreme socialism. And that, in my opinion, is when the brown, smelly stuff will hit the fan! Already today, there are vast differences between the mid-west of the union and the two seaboards. Will the citizens of the prosperous, tax-light mid-West, imbued as they are with old-fashioned ideas of American virtue, take kindly to the idea of the United Socialist States of America? I don't think so, but the question is, will they do anything about it? And if they do, which way will the military move - particularly the reservists who have local loyalties? (Incidentally, now you see why elements of the Democrat party are so keen to disarm the populace, it has nothing to do with poor little 'kiddie-winkies' being shot dead by nutters but everything to do with the coming battle they see as likely!)
To stand any chance of success, the Republican party needs to think ahead in the same way that the Alinsky-ites do. It is essential that they have ready a political plan for secession which they can put into operation before any 'cowboy' hotheads start shooting. Like all wars these days, it is the message that counts and ill-defined acts of violence will put people off particularly when virtually the entire media is against you.
So, only two questions remain. Do I think secession is likely? No, but it is, just, a possibility. Will it succeed? Nah!
"particularly when virtually the entire media is against you"
I'm not sure this is relevant, at least to those not already 'on the left'. From my reading, and friends/acquaintances expressed opinions, 'the media' as such has already 'shot its bolt'. It is already widely seen as biased, corrupt, ideologically led and simply outright liars.
Did the proclamations from Pravda affect beliefs/actions in communist Russia? Perhaps, but only those of the sections either already supporting the regime or those without strong views (or experiences to cause the development of such). They certainly, and possibly applicable, weren't seen as 'honest' by those in other countries.
And it's not just the media where there is this recognition (here too, but much more widespread and openly expressed in the US) but education too - 'The K12 explosion' as an example.
I still feel that secession is unlikely mainly because those with the most reason to consider it are also those who view the concept of 'The United States of America' worth saving, fighting and dying for. If a situation arose where 'the left' faced similar pressures? Then they (similar to our own leftist anti-colonial, pro-European super-state mercenary ideologues) would literally jump at the chance.
Posted by: Able | Wednesday, 24 April 2013 at 10:42
I wouldn't be too quick to discount the power of the media. Most 'ordinary folk' in America do not consider their papers and TV to be similar in any way to Pravda, hence Obama's stunning victory.
I agree that the internet is having an effect but people will tend to follow what they are sympathetic to and that just re-enforces their opinions.
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 24 April 2013 at 10:53
Duffers, could you have a word with your young bloggy lady friends? Your "comments" are taking an age to open.
Posted by: dearieme | Wednesday, 24 April 2013 at 11:09
I have just picked up your comment above, DM, at 13.02 and I have checked various of my 'comment' threads and they all seem to be working OK. Is it your end, dare I ask? Anyway, I may not be able to speak to my Californian chicks because they tend to spend the lunch breaks roller-skating up and down the promenade - or that's how I like to imagine them!
Seriously, let me know if the fault continues.
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 24 April 2013 at 13:06
Up to ten years ago my main source of information was printed copies of The American Spectator which arrived once a month, the rest of the media being quite beyond my reach. But now I can not only read and watch the main media, I can also, if so minded, follow the regional news.
You realize David, you owe me a debt of sorts - I'm of the opinion that prior to my coming around to twiggle your inputs, you paid far far too much attention to the "media capitals." For instance, until my arrival, the only thing you seemed to know about Arkansas in general, middle America in particular (I know that clause likely seems odd but I think you know precisely what I mean, perhaps Able) was it was the region HillBilly, er, "arose" from.
Able makes an astute observation - I think the MSM's "power" is way overhyped/accepted by too many, especially by the Right! The powers in DC better get a grip on that in my opinion 'fact' else they keep the high regard for their own opinions as to what is "best" for us in the red states. Able's point can perhaps be easiest illustrated by what happened during the most recent cycle in Missouri.
Recall the "frenzy" Todd Akin managed to stir up - not in Missouri itself, rather in Washington DC?
Posted by: JK | Wednesday, 24 April 2013 at 15:42