Concerned about the centralization of soft and hard power in the U.S. into the hands of forces aligned with the Democratic Party, the CEO of Gab.com wrote “I am going to fight for a country… where my children can grow up without being attacked for their political opinion, faith, and skin color.” How can conservatives achieve this goal, when almost every institution of power in the U.S. is aligned with the Left? If you want a comfortable answer, rather than a pragmatic one, read no further. Every other Western country has fallen to the globalist Leftist consensus. If we wish to avoid the same fate, Americans may have to separate from the blue states as our forefathers separated from Great Britain in 1776.
The coordinated attempt in the media before the election to prepare Americans for a coup, along with the coordinated attempt among elections officials to steal the election, followed by the media cover up, proves that the ruling class feels it doesn’t need to hew as closely to law as it did when the it was weaker.
Therefore exposing crime, evil, and hypocrisy is no longer a reliable path to correcting these ills because the current power structure is willing to ignore these if they benefit the ruling class. This is why attempts to correct the voting system will fail. The ruling class does not respect the will of the voters because some voters are deplorables.
The only way to root out these ills now is to build an alternate power structure that prioritizes such things: a federation of red states and other red counties.
Elections are not the answer, even if conservatives convince swing states to get rid of Dominion Voting Systems hardware, because the U.S. electorate has been adulterated. Resist the seductive fiction that America would be fine if only the votes had been counted correctly. Electronic vote switching can only excuse recent electoral defeats at most, because electronic voting machines only became widespread after the Bush/Gore election. Non-electronic fraud may have been a feature in big cities in some swing states even earlier, but the overall fact of American politics is that the American electorate hasn’t cooperated with our dreams of reinstating normalcy by getting true conservatives elected. Even 45% of Republicans told pollsters that the GOP’s positions are “too extreme.” Is it any wonder that conservatives are not in charge of our society even when we win elections?
Social media censorship means that we can’t even persuade swing voters, who don’t use Parler, don’t seek out conservative media, and were educated in Leftist schools and universities in the U.S. or abroad. Democrats will soon be able to give voting rights to as many foreigners as is necessary to ensure that someone like a Trump could never win a national election. Obama spent $2 billion to win the presidency. Then after Trump won, George Soros donated $18 billion to his leftist organization. This money will be spent to keep conservatives out of power. Imagine how much Soros will bequeath at his death!
The wickedness and power of the Left, and the anti-American ruling class aligned with the Left, has left normal Americans with few good options to keep the American parts of America American. Some argue that the Right could take control by force, perhaps in a counter-coup against Biden’s current coup. They say patriots could provoke a conflict that would mobilize the Right to achieve such an objective, and convince the US military to stand by or even assist. Even before this election, 51% of Republicans in a poll agreed that “The traditional American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it.” Half of gun buyers stated that a reason for their purchase is the government “going too far.”
But soon it would be obvious that the cost in blood and treasure of keeping half the country subjugated to right-wing control would be too great. Removing the right to vote from certain populations is not politically sustainable in the long term, nor worth the effort of subjugation. Neither is deportation of US voters the answer, because that would mean the starvation of tens of millions of our relatives and friends. The only continent that might be able to receive and eventually employ such a number of first-worlders is Europe, which would not have the political alignment with us to be willing to cooperate with a deportation scheme.
The solution is to leave some territory for the Left: the blue parts of the blue states. This is a solution that can be achieved without force, and without forced migration. If the problem is that the electorate is not conservative enough to maintain a free, solvent country, then the solution is to retrench to a position of strength by cutting off part of the electorate, by drawing a new border. Israel learned this lesson; it separated from Palestinians and then built walls, which have proven to be well worth the cost.
The farther apart political parties are ideologically, the higher the stakes in elections, as long as both have a shot at winning. High stakes increase tensions regarding party affiliation and anything related to party affiliation, such as race, which set Americans against each other. The gulf between red-state culture and blue-state culture does not need to lead to more violence if the two cultures become two separate countries because the two cultures would no longer be in a high-stakes competition in federal elections. To compete in elections in a red-state federation, both coalitions of a two-party system would have to honor red-state culture, lowering the stakes and the political temperature. Leftist voters will no longer be a threat in red states, or vice versa, because their views will no longer be reflected in a political party that might win state or federation elections. Those Leftists who can’t stand living in a right-wing country would voluntarily emigrate to a the blue states, and vice versa. The goal is not ideological conformity, but merely an electoral majority.
Some argue that splitting the U.S. is not a solution because red and blue cultures are geographically intermixed. But 71% of Trump voters and 71% of Hillary voters would find themselves on the correct side of the new border in a map predicted by this author. The map (above) assumes that Texas or California secede, and then red states or blue states follow their lead. Red states would recognize that they can’t win federal elections without Texas, so secession only needs to be popular in one state for the U.S. to split in half. The map further assumes that both red states and blue states allow certain counties to split off and join the opposite country. The motivation would be to restore political harmony within the state. In most blue states, red counties are working-class rural counties that don’t pay their share of income taxes, and most state governments don’t collect property taxes, so they should be willing to let red counties depart the state. This author used county-by-county data of the Trump/Hillary contest to calculate the numbers mentioned above assuming a mere 20% of Hillary voters in Trump states voluntarily emigrate, as well as 20% of Trump voters in Hillary states.
It’s time to stop arguing amongst ourselves about what the US government should do, because conservatives will never be in charge of it again. It’s time to think about what state governments and conservative activists can do. A federation of red states, made up of counties that voted 75% Trump and 25% Hillary, would be a federation that would use government power to wrest from Leftists control over red-state institutions of power such as education and media. In such a federation, states would no longer be constrained by federal judges. The reddest states could implement all the solutions conservatives have dreamed up, because the electorate would support those solutions, unlike the 50-state electorate. Each state could have its own citizenship and keep control over who gets to live in their state, after the voluntary migration that would occur immediately after the split.
McCain and Romney became presidential nominees because of blue-state Republican primaries. Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum won most of the red-state primaries until the races were decided. Migration from blue states would make red states redder. In red states after the U.S. splits, the right-wing party would not need to accommodate such a big tent as the Republican Party does. The Left-leaning party would have to accommodate independents, RINO’s, and, depending on the state, some elements of the conservative coalition to win an election.
This table shows how many voters each state would have if counties were swapped, states split, and 20% of voters who are in the wrong country move to the other country.
“Rebecca” has written persuasive arguments for a partition of U.S. territory, but ends up advocating for a new federalism. Her amendments to the Constitution would be inadequate to restraining the overreach of the federal judiciary. Roe v. Wade indicates that our legal class can and will hand-wave away her amendments just as they already redefined the rest of the Constitution, and are motivated to impose federal cultural preferences on all states. Moreover, Rebecca doesn’t tell us what incentives would be in place to prevent the federal government from trampling on red-state rights, as they were trampled subsequent to the other time a federal structure was established in 1789. Until 1865, states had a check and balance on the federal government in the form of the threat of secession and the strength of their state military. This leverage needs to be restored to states in a federation of red states.
Here’s a middle path that sounds less radical than secession. It could be called an extreme form of autonomy. Let the red-state federation and the blue-state abomination become two separate countries in every way, except that they continue to share the federal reserve & currency (if that’s the popular choice), and share a military, which would consist of the military of each red state and the military of the blue-state entity. The military, held in common, would be led by someone called the “Commander in Chief,” the only person left who would still be elected by all the people of the USA. He would be someone different from the president of the blue states and different from whoever leads the red-state federation. The blue-state entity would have a president, Congress, and judiciary at Washington DC. None of these would have any power or jurisdiction over red states. The red states would have their own constitution, which would presumably respect states’ rights.
My motivation for suggesting this middle path is that it might be easier to convince people to accept it as compared to secession. The red states would no longer have to fear that the US would send the FBI or judicial rulings to strip their rights. There would be no US agents to impose penalties or enforce laws. Only red states or the red-state federation would have laws and enforcement of laws in red-state territory. A red state’s military would be deterrent enough to prevent pressure on the state from other states.
Now let’s return to the idea of a total split of the US, including the military. If the split is peacefully negotiated, as has happened in many countries, each state would get its share of federal assets and liabilities, including military assets. Understandably, conservatives balk at the idea of watching the blue states take possession of half the U.S. military. But our most dangerous enemy is the American Left, not foreign armies. So our safest option is to separate from the blue states so that they are in charge of a 20-state military, not our 50-state military. Patriots are being replaced with non-patriots in our military. Conservatives used to think of the U.S. as a continental fortress to fend off Communism. Now that commie-friendly officials operate our FBI/CIA, and pay our “president-elect’s” family, the U.S. is becoming a continental prison. A red-state federation would not be compromised like the U.S., so it would have the will and the internal coherence to resist Chinese or blue-state economic pressure, and punish infringements on its sovereignty. It’s better to have enemies outside the camp than inside the camp, even if this causes us to have a smaller camp.
In 1776, British North America was divided between two countries. A nation of red states and a nation of blue states could relate to each other peacefully as the USA and Canada do. We share rivers and an electrical grid with Canada and some commute to work in Canada. Every country in the world engages in international trade, so the red states need not be self-sufficient.
Momentum is Building
Before the BLM/Antifa riots began, splitting the US was not nearly as viral an idea on Facebook as the idea of splitting blue states such as Illinois in half. But since the BLM riots started, searches for “secession” on YouTube ballooned such that my 2018 video on splitting the U.S. got twice as many views in 3 months as it had in the prior 24 months.
So if splitting the U.S. is now a popular idea, as splitting blue states already was, how popular was splitting blue states? So popular that a handful of unpaid activists with day jobs managed to organize a movement to get county separation from Chicago onto 2020 ballots in 23 counties by collecting signatures. All 23 counties voted in favor of separating; one voted 63% in favor and 22 voted between 70% and 80% in favor. Now my group is reaching out to legislators of neighboring states to ask them to have their governments fund studies on the impacts of moving state lines to annex southern and central Illinois.
Last month, two conservative counties in Oregon voted in favor of the idea of moving the Oregon/Idaho state line, in the hope that southern and eastern Oregon may become a part of Idaho. More will vote on the issue in May 2021. Relocation of a state border occurs via an interstate compact between two states, if approved by Congress, and Oregonians (another group of unpaid activists) have articulated why moving the border is a win for each of the decision-making bodies involved. Gaining access to international waters and airspace, at the Pacific Ocean, might provide the self-confidence necessary for Idaho to lead the red states out of the Union if Idaho someday finds that to be in its interest.
Collin Cliburn is the leader of the group that originated and ran the Illinois referendum campaign with a bit of help from my Illinois group. He and I are considering launching a similar petition effort at the county level to lead to secession from Biden’s America, which would take place as soon as the group of counties reaches all the way to international waters (in the Gulf of Mexico).
As the Left consolidates cultural power in the U.S., red-state Republicans will experience the same cultural alienation and electoral powerlessness that blue-state Republicans feel. A poll in September found 40% of U.S. residents were in favor of their own state seceding if their candidate loses the presidential election. The results would have been even better if the poll has asked about joining a group of like-minded states to secede. Since some states are landlocked, their residents aren’t likely to want to be the first state to secede. If the U.S. average is 40%, the number should be above 50% in some states.
A December 12, 2020 poll by Victory Insights found only 1/3 of Texas Republicans are opposed to seceding now. Democrats were not polled but usually are equally in favor of secession. Latinos are the ethnicity that are most in favor of secession, especially in Texas.
In July 2016, more Texans favored secession than opposed it. Recently, delegates to the Republican Party of Texas Convention voted 93% in favor of adding a plank to their platform asserting the right of Texas to secede if the federal government violates the US Constitution. Have you noticed any violations? On December 8, State Rep. Kyle Biedermann announced that he would introduce a bill in the Texas Legislature that would require a state referendum on seceding from the US. Yes, Texas is now purple, but its secession would lead to an influx of conservatives, entrepreneurs, and libertarians from 49 states and a voluntary outflow of Leftists and people fearful of losing federal social services.
Two Opposed Cultures
In the Spring of 2019, 79% of US residents agreed that “I’m tired of leaders compromising my values and ideals. I want leaders who will stand up to the other side.” 85% of Republicans and 78% of Democrats agreed. Since neither side will elect politicians who compromise on their conception of justice, then compromise can only be on where these two moralities will have the power of law.
“Stop the steal” is not enough. We need to stop sharing elections with populations who will continue to cheat, whose worldview and lack of religion enable their reflexive fraud. We can share a continent with them, but we can’t share a country with them. “Jim’s blog” wrote:
Democracy requires a level of trust and comity between the parties that no longer exists.
The loser has to believe that loss will not be total, permanent, and result in his destruction.
Because the Democrats have been indulged by law enforcement for a long time, they have committed all manner of crimes, and will go to jail if law enforcement is done in an impartial manner.
Because law enforcement is not done in an impartial manner, the Republicans will go to jail if it is not fixed. If Republicans lose power now, they are permanently and irreversibly out of power…
Currently, the Anglosphere includes Canada, the U.S., the UK, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. Splitting the U.S. will merely increase the membership of that club. For the same reason (bad voters) that we should not want the U.S. to annex Canada or Mexico, we should not want to share a government with blue states.
If civic nationalism is to hold the states together, there must be some symbols and content to that nationalism. But the Left has rejected all of it, including the founding fathers themselves, leaving nothing but inertia holding the Union together.
It is not uncommon for respected authors from the Left or Right to promote splitting the U.S. But the shortage of activists and funding for secession movements makes mass political violence seem inevitable because these are the movements that might end the power struggle between two cultural giants for control of Washington D.C. But perhaps that violence in itself will be enough to convince Americans to try the peaceful solution of splitting the U.S. to end the bloodshed, as lethal mass riots in Malaysia led to the peacefully negotiated secession of Singapore.