Could the current global financial crisis, two wars, a coming credit crisis, polarized political parties and volatile fuel prices cause the United States to splinter into separate countries? Some tend to think so.
Igor Panarin, a professor at the Diplomatic Academy in Moscow sees the US breaking up into six countries in the near future, brought on by the financial crisis. What might the US look like post-split? Panarin envisions Texas as its own nation, the Pacific States, Atlantic/New England States, The Hispanic South, The Canadian North and the no-man's land of the Central US. I've taken the liberty of drawing out what such a place would look like. As you see, I've lumped Kentucky in with the Hispanic South. Here's a link to help you prepare for what's to come. Alaska would more than likely be "returned" to Russia, as it's just leased to us, anyway. Hawaii will just continue to be the land of rainbows.
Of course, I had to chuckle to myself when I read this article. I mean, this guy is calling out the US when Russia is having problems hanging on to its own territories? Though there is playful talk of Texas being its own country, no one believes it will ever happen. But what about Tatarstan? Chechnya? Dagestan? These all have serious separatist movements that could, at any time, cause trouble for the Russian state. More than likely this guy just likes to see his name in the headlines. But it does make for an interesting topic of conversation.
It's been a popular sentiment over the years that the end of the United States is nigh. Even though at this juncture in history is appears the the US is more politically divided than ever, it would take an issue of enormous proportions to strain the States enough to even consider breaking. What say you? Could the US ever split?
But, if you do decide to start a separatist movement, I know where you can get some advice.
2 comments:
Heinlein predicted that it would break apart by the '80s, when he was writing in the 60s, as I recall. (Or maybe he didn't give a date, but that at some point in his main time line's history, it did.)
The collapse of the US has been predicted since the founding of the country, and while we did come close once, it's not likely any time in the near future.
I think that thinking such as this makes sense coming from someone who comes from a history of a country breaking up. The different parts that made up the USSR didn't necessarily come together out of some noble ideal or common belief, but rather through force. It fell apart pretty quickly, and continues to disintegrate. But in the former USSR, people are considered to be ethnically different from each other and want autonomy over their own section. Just look at the Georgia situation with South Ossetia. The Ossetians feel they are a completely different people from the Georgians. You can see it in Armenia and Azerbaijan too with Nagorno-Karabach, or Chechnya.
But Americans don't feel this way. Kentuckians aren't different ethnically from Californians simply because of what state they are from. And American was founded on the blending of different cultures, so it is hard to believe that a split would happen. But his argument does make sense when you think about where he is coming from.
Post a Comment