Opinion /

American Schism: Problems with the 'Peaceful Divorce' Argument

A recent poll suggests that some Americans would support a “national divorce” resulting in red states and blue states forming their own country akin to the Union and the Confederacy during the Civil War.

The cause of such a proposal is the immense polarization that has taken place over the past three decades. The problem with secession is that any kind of U.S. split would only worsen the standard of living in both halves and ultimately empower the largest profiteer of a “national divorce” — the People’s Republic of China. China would pillage U.S. natural resources and co-opt roughly one-half of the United States. Rather than splitting the Union, Americans should focus on finding common ground that was unearthed throughout the last pre-polarization decade.

What are the root causes of a possible American schism? It’s important to understand how we went from a country-wide consensus to the current red versus blue divide.

The past thirty years has seen polarization in America more heightened than at any point in the past century. Beginning in the early 2000s, the concept of a “Red America” or “Blue America” became a major focus for pundits and political analysts. The conduct of the Biden administration has only exacerbated these fissures. The Biden campaign sold the 46th President to the electorate as an experienced moderate who would put the U.S. on the right track. However, in early September, one poll indicated that 61% of Americans feel that the U.S. is on the wrong track. The whole “God, guns, and guts” cultural fault lines of the past have been complicated with the rise of new topics of contention, including the popularized DiAngelo-Kendi brand of Critical Race Theory, pandemic related lockdowns, mask mandates, and a push to limit everything from natural gas to meat consumption in the name of the climate.

The Biden administration’s advocacy of these measures, in addition to the Afghanistan disaster, the rampant inflation along with supply chain issues, the attorney general’s assertion that parents are threatening violence against school administrators, and the border crisis contribute to the reasons that Biden has lost the backing of independents. Biden’s administration focuses on placating progressives rather than maintaining the trust of moderates.

As a result, calls for a “peaceful divorce” have gained ground. Given all that has transpired, some might wonder “what’s the worst that could happen?” when implementing a peaceful, national divorce.

Separating the United States into two halves would most likely lead to global catastrophe. The “blue half” that supports things like masking toddlers and banning gas-powered cars, stoves, and heating would be trading short-term virtue signaling for long-term pain. The masking of children has documented adverse effects on their development, potentially leading to lifelong psychological complications down the road. (It would be the worst common hardship faced by children since the adverse effects of the prevalence of lead in homes. Exposure to lead has been proven to be linked to violence and mental illness and is also considered by some to be a major cause in sparking the crime wave of the 1960s through the 1980s.) The blue states might continue the course of defunding the police, leaving most of Blue America with an even larger unstoppable crime wave — and if blue state media outlets stay the course, they would actively ignore surging crime and unrest.

In addition, an “only-wind-and-solar” approach to energy would fail as Texas’ frozen wind turbine incident suggests, while in practice such a country would be at the mercy of OPEC. Brownouts, blackouts, and wildfires like California currently faces, along with high energy bills, would likely lie ahead in the future for “blue states.” Not to mention the fact that California’s status as a high-poverty, high-inequality state would be emulated by the rest of the blue states.

If you think that the effects of a “national divorce” would only impact domestic affairs, think again. The blue half would more than likely be a partner — wittingly or unwittingly — of Communist China.

China — despite its commitment to coal plants with few if any safety standards — has been a beneficiary of the push to cover everything in solar panels. To ease the hardships in the “blue half,” the People’s Republic of China would seek to take advantage of the natural resources of the area, such as the timber and minerals of the West Coast. The People’s Republic of China would follow the playbook they’ve been using in sub-Saharan Africa, financing infrastructure and urbanizing regions of the continent. Zimbabwean businessman Trevor Ncube has even stated, “If the British were our masters yesterday, the Chinese have taken their place.” Guy Scott, a Zambian former agricultural minister, remarked in 2007: “We’ve had bad people before. The whites were bad, the Indians were worse, but the Chinese are worst of all.”

As Chinese weapons are utilized in civil wars on the continent, and Chinese loans are used to control countries financially, the CCP is essentially colonizing and subjugating Africa for raw materials. These same predatory, divide-and-conquer investment tactics they’ve employed in Africa could be used to control the “blue half” of the U.S. Meanwhile, the “red half” would end up putting together an international coalition to counter the CCP.

This period of division between blue states and red states has yielded not only polarization but little in the way of improving Americans’ lives. Many have pushed the idea that America’s divides are the fault of Republicans. However, the most recent “national consensus” landslide, when Americans were united, took place following Republican Ronald Reagan’s two terms in office.

Reagan’s vice president, Republican George H.W. Bush, prevailed in 1988 over Democrat Michael Dukakis. Dukakis’ soft-on-crime stance was very much the “defund the police” of the day. Since then, the past few Democratic presidential administrations have been responsible for some of the decisions that have proven to be profoundly unwise for our country. One decision was letting Communist China into the World Trade Organization, leading to the loss of American manufacturing jobs and heightening tensions in states with manufacturing economies. Another was the passage and signing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which enabled today’s media monoculture by allowing broadcast media to be concentrated in the hands in a few corporate behemoths. Still another strategic blunder was the White House’s and Congress’s failure to support the 2009 Green Movement in Iran, setting the stage for the failed Iran Deal.

These are just a handful of the numerous failures that the blue-state-red-state era has wrought. Most recently, the U.S. has seen its credibility on the world stage suffer, going from the undisputed leader of the free world to a nation in retreat — epitomized by Biden’s policies towards Afghanistan. The current president’s Department of Justice directive to consider parents who attend and advocate at school board meetings to be domestic terrorists is truly one for the books as an exercise in elitist authoritarianism.

As much as it may be tempting to cordon off the elitist authoritarianism emanating from the Acela Corridor, a back-to-basics American government would be far more effective in rebuilding the unity that the country had throughout the last landslide in 1988. Even Tom Brokaw, himself a liberal Democrat, admitted more recently that Ronald Reagan, a Republican, brought the country together. The leaders of both mainstream parties believed in individual freedom and a strong America in the context of the Cold War. They had similar end goals but differed primarily on their way to get there.

A government that unequivocally respects constitutional freedoms established by the Bill of Rights would earn the trust of Americans from all sides. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion were historically valued by both Democrats and Republicans. A government that prioritizes the needs of the American people and respects the liberty of its citizens would have far more impact domestically and abroad. Can it be done? Only if Democrats and Republicans believe in upholding the Constitution and preserving freedom in America.

*For corrections please email [email protected]*

19 responses to “American Schism: Problems with the ‘Peaceful Divorce’ Argument”

  1. rambo88 says:

    TLDR; “You need big government because the scary chinaman might come get you!!”

  2. rambo88 says:

    The Chinese don’t have the means or incentive to invade, this fear mongering has zero basis in fact

  3. rambo88 says:

    Bbbbbut China!

  4. Moiseevy1 says:

    Right on!!!

  5. JMac says:

    I see a lot of these articles today talking about what an ideal, unified government would look like. Nothing I’ve read yet credibly gets us there.

    It’s time to talk about real solutions. Our politicians won’t change, and it’ll be too late by the time you vote them all out, if you even can or do. I’m seeing fewer ways out that don’t involve massive violence. I’d love to be wrong about that, but you cannot continue on the way things are currently going and not get a violent revolution.

    Imagine what our Founders would be saying right now.

  6. Wolv256 says:

    There will not be a peaceful divorce. It’s more likely to go the OJ Simpson route.

  7. Wolv256 says:

    It can never be peaceful. I don’t concede one inch to these assholes. They get nothing. This is our country. F—- these people. If they hate this country so much, THEY can leave. But they do NOT get half of our stuff. They can leave in shame in the middle of the night and never come back. That is the only path forward. We will NEVER forgive, forget, compromise, or negotiate with these people.

  8. This is all happening because the left is in full control of the narrative and I would respectfully submit that if somehow control of the number one leftist propaganda machine CNN were to be placed in the hands of real journalists like say the Tim Cast group and CNN became dedicated to the truth and real reporting after the initial shock I think things would quickly start to change. As propaganda is not only the left’s main weapon it is for the most part their only weapon; take away CNN and you would quickly find them disappearing like cockroaches scattering in to the cracks when the light is turned on. What would happen if the various internet entities, like Tim Cast, Joe Rogan, Project Veritas and so on pooled there resources with the goal of acquiring control of CNN for the purpose of conducting real journalism and as an un-cancelable platform for truthful accurate programming. That indeed would be a site to see. Imagine Brian Stelter’s vacuous chrome dome replaced with the black beanie. It would be the rough equivalent to the left of Slim Whitman being played to the Martians in “Mars Attacks”. I have to think that upon the realization that all this division was artificially generated most of the adversarial feelings in this country would greatly dissipate and we would once again realize our true strength lies in unity.

  9. Chukui says:

    divide and rule, a sound motto. Unite and lead a better one.

  10. Chukui says:

    i kinda do. I think its mostly due to how many people from all over the country are coming in, mainly from democratic cities, that there was a shift in party alignment. its been happening slowly. i remember back in 2008 when i turned 18, AZ was very red but slowly as more and more people started coming in i saw a slow shift to democrat. also i joined the military that year and when i came back 3 years later i saw that phoenix had grown substantially and shifted during obamas first term. i remember back in 2012 were the az republic news paper saying that az was heading to becoming a blue state and the blowback the article got for even daring to say such blasphemy to the majority republican state.

  11. TheDarkWall says:

    I think the most pragmatic solution to this problem is not a divorce for the reasons you outlined here. Personally I think what is most needed is a narrative shift. Outside of the constitution, states were largely supposed to have their own laws. But now the federal government has grossly overstepped it’s authority so now we’re one nation largely controlled by a single legislature. So what we need is a president that makes redrawing the federal governments authority part of the narrative. The american people need to have the overstepping explained to them as well as the boundaries that the government should have.

    Essentially the peaceful divorce concept is bred from a desire for self governance from state to state, which is how it’s mainly supposed to work under the original framework. We don’t need to scrap the concept we started with, we need to go back to it.

  12. MakeMenGr8AGAIN says:

    I don’t believe Arizonas. It’s not that blue

  13. Elismith says:

    If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 
    And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 
    Mark 3:24-25

  14. anarchohioan says:

    Half of this article seems to be saying that there shouldn’t be a national divorce because blue states will continue to go to shit. Well, that’s happening under current circumstances, but they’re also dragging red states to hell along with them. Despite this Iraq War-esq fear mongering, I fail to see how the internal politics of a Blue State America would be any of my concern.

    As Michael Malice says, discussion of how a national divorce would work is evidence that we are already a large portion of the way there.


  15. pandusa says:

    The founding fathers could not foresee big tech, mass and social media ect. What they DID foresee was a power play by the Federal Government, to federalize under one umbrella
    ( ex.- elections, education, gun control policies, law enforcement ). The States created the Federal Government-not the other way around. Originally, it was to “provide for the common defense and general welfare” of the U.S. but has obviously jumped the fence. The Constitution (in Article V) provided a remedy to put the Federal Government back into the “balance of power” as was intended. Convention of States.com. Check it out. At this point, what have we got to lose? Frustrated ? Don’t just stand there… DO something ! It is peaceful, lawful, and by the book. Our elected officials are unable or unwilling to defend us (term limits are among the issues). Lets Do It America! Keep the States, the States.

  16. Devilsgun says:

    This proposed ‘amicable divorce’ would never work with the states remaining in their current ‘legacy’ configuration – The Leftist Cancer has solidly metastasized in the heavy urban areas in so-called “Blue” states but the surrounding areas in those states are pretty much always “Solid Red”, which means that if the states are given over to the authoritarian leftists millions of liberty minded people would be essentially handed over to brutal repression, retribution, and God only knows what kind of evil… I could see Leftie caravans getting ‘free passage’ through Red territory to leave, but it’s highly unlikely that the Leftists would allow ‘Domestic Terrorist MAGAt Nazi Racist Misogynist Trumpies’ to leave for safe (Red) havens alive, given their hateful and psychotic rhetoric and vengeful actions towards them thus far…

    In the Midwest many of the larger ‘legacy states’ (looking at YOU, Colorado) would need to be shattered into several new, smaller sized states to allow folks in the non-urban “Red” areas a chance at life free from Leftist/Authoritarian oppression. It would be better to march those brutalist invading Leftfucks back to Southern California but the sepsis and rot is set in pretty deep after decades of ignorant, greedy local sellouts throwing their fellows under the bus for personal benefit, so ‘containment’ via establishment of an autonomous Denver/Boulder corridor ‘nation-state’ a’la The Vatican might be a more plausible and less brutal alternative, though it’s a Hell of a rip for us Colorado natives to lose the Queen City of the Plains to those freaks. A walled-off Leftist Utopia where they can rule themselves as they please, with a wide ‘quasi-Libertarian/anything goes’ buffer/trade zone between them and the more conservative rural “red” areas, might be the ticket to avoid massive bloodshed and animosity between us at this point. Allow Weld County and the other ‘free counties’ on the Front Range to determine their own futures without draconian edicts by tyrants like Jared Polis, maybe have a split down the Continental Divide and establish a proper Western Colorado state so the Western Slope isn’t under Denver’s spiked heels anymore, and establish trade agreements that are beneficial to everyone in the Post-American Southwest.

    In either case we have to make this proposed divide work well enough for everybody, both “Red” and “Blue”, to keep amicable enough to have defensive pacts, trade relations, etc, because failing to do so only opens the door for China and other enemies to wreak havoc on the new, smaller ‘nations’ if we can’t band together for mutual defense.

  17. RevolutionaryReformer says:

    Attempting to turn Cali Red has been tiresome, thinking of setting roots somewhere else so family has a place to retreat to just in case.

  18. Joann says:

    Well written. I truly believe that a ”divorce” would allow China to walk right in to the Blue States.

  19. HayleySmith says:

    Great article! Please expand!