If a country is divided into two radically different religions of near equal size, should they separate into two countries?

[KelleyNice]

There are two religions in the USA—socialism and capitalism and it may be they will never find common ground. The socialists are teacher unions and most college professors, and most government workers and people on welfare and they younger more than the older. They support a big government that uses force to rob from the productive to give to them and the less productive. The capitalist are mostly the people that produce.

An approximate division of the two religions are the blue vs. the red states. Mostly, large population centers vs. rural areas.

Most likely the capitalist would agree to a peaceful separation but the socialists would not agree since they believe using force to force people to comply.

[Sixgunsound]

The socialist party (not a religion, a party) cannot agree to a peaceful separation because they would starve without workers they allegedly care about to exploit. Good flipping riddance.

[Sixgunsound]

Also as much as we historically have agreed upon, I don’t think your map is accurate.

[KelleyNice]

The map I found on the internet. I was looking for map or photo that showed a separation; not that it was accurate, even at the time and certainly not in modern USA.

[KelleyNice]

Perhaps religion is not the best word. However, the effect is the same as two very different religions.

[Sixgunsound]

Thanks for MHO

[Avicenna]

I think a peaceful split into two countries should be negotiated. The leftist entity, whatever it’s called, would of course try its best to undermine and control the other one.

[Avicenna]

Thanks for the mho

[normalice]

Sure, but its important to remember that the entire country is "purple". For example, Austin, Texas is deeper blue than all of California. Wheras Carbondale, California is deeper red than all of Texas. If we're really going to split up as a country then we need to pay to relocate all the right wingers to the confederacy and everyone else out of the confederacy. This is a process that could take decades.

And it would definitely cost trillions, which is only fair if we split the bill. The problem, then, becomes the fact that the confederacy would be ran by people who have built their whole livelihoods out of not paying their debts. And as the confederacy will have basically just turned into Hot Russia, the Union would continue to flourish. Hot Russia would notice this and get real spiteful - they were told the libs were responsible for all the problems then the libs left but the problems didn't seem to follow them. Contrarily, the problems stayed right where they were and, if anything, got much worse as the blue states stopped giving welfare money to red states. It is the height of being subjugated to be the victim of a scam and no one likes feeling like they've been taken advantage of - especially if that scam has been running their whole life. The confederacy would react with violence. They would see the shining beacon the libs made for themselves and get real pissed as the only nondepressing alternative to admitting they were tricked. They would want to show that might is right and try to just take what the liberals made for themselves. And that's when the real civil war begins.

Of course this all started with the "if you dont like it go away" rhetoric. This shut down debate and thereby democracy. It's the tiny crack that became the gaping chasm of irreconcilable division in this country. And, of course, it was started by rich people who got rich by not paying their debts..

[KelleyNice]

@normalice the cost would be nominal, if anything. The division would be by states but allowing cities on the border to join an adjacent state. People inside a state could choose to move at their expense. Most would stay and abide by any new laws. If any state decided they made a horrible mistake (probably limited to the socialists), they could apply to rejoin the other states. Perhaps they would be accepted and after 17 years be allowed to vote.

[normalice]

It is a symptom of privilege to assume people can move at their own expense. The vast majority can not afford to do so. And be they "blue poor" or "red poor," both elements will remain in Hot Russia and the US unless someone pays to move them - both elements will resist any expectation that they change their lifestyle due to a regime change that will feel has nothing to do with them.

Entire businesses will need to be relocated. Those wanting to capitalize on intellectual talent will be forced to set up in the US, paying slightly higher taxes regardless of their political leanings, or deal with the lesser talent pool that comes from the culture of anti-intellectualism in Hot Russia. None of this relocation will be cheap and pretty much 100% of businesses are only profitable because they get the public to foot the bill whenever possible. It's fun to pretend business owners are some rugged individualists that struck out and made their fortune based on their own wits but in real life all it usually is is they inherited lots of money and then found the right politician to pay to give them some tax subsidies. Everyone calls this capitalism instead of socialism for some reason, but really, in the most ideal case, the US would become socialism for the poor and Hot Russia would become socialism for the rich. Just like cold russia.

[KelleyNice]

How did all the poor white people get to the Americas? Obviously, you just want to argue and facts don't matter. You may have the last word but I'm done with you.

[normalice]

Every poor person in the US has their own origin story. Most are some variation of "worked all my life but still poor," through..

[MCheetah]

This is not a question that has a clear right or wrong answer. It's like asking, "should two people who have been together for a long time and have a 19 year old child or children, get a divorce?"

I don't know if America should get a divorce. However, I DO know that it's a far weaker, far lesser force split into two, than united as one. I believe, in the end, no one but the filthy rich and elitists would gain anything from America's divorce. Since, you know, they're the ones fueling all this hatred and anger, to begin with.

Getting back to the question though; MOST Americans (and people in other similarly divided countries) are "purple" more than anything. Once people get off the internet and politics are banned from discussion, you end up finding out that people have a lot more in common than their differences (except in the case of me though; I'm an alien-brain and most people annoy me).

Most of America is neither Red nor Blue; it's Purple.

https://purplestatesofamerica.org

[DJB72]

Socialism and Capitalism aren't religions, they're socio-economic systems. For some reason American schools try to teach that communism and socialism are synonymous.

They aren't.

Look at Sweden's economy. Consistently high performing in terms of personal income, access to healthcare and ultra-low levels of corruption.

They're a democratic socialist society.

All Scandinavian countries share similar statistics and all are far greater socialist societies than the USSR ever was.

That's the problem. Soviet Socialist policies were bastardised Marxist theory butchered to replace the Tsars in Russia and the Emperors in China with "common" men like Lenin and Mao. All it effectively did was replace one elite minority with a different elite minority.

For future reading, get hold of Animal Farm and 1984.

A nation divided against itself will inevitably fall. The fact you call the South the "Confederate" states on your picture may be ironic, but I suspect it's more based in misunderstanding or miseducation about what the Confederate States stood for. The "right" to keep human beings as property with no rights inherent to humanity.

Lincoln said no outside force would destroy America. He was right. MAGA morons are doing it just fine from inside.

[DWornock]

Yes! The idea that a country with multi cultures is false as that leads to needless confrontations. In the USA, race gives mixed results. Having Asians who tend to be better educated if not more intelligent than whites may be an advantage. However, since on average blacks have IQs of about 85 they are on the far left, the disadvantages of having blacks far outweighs the advantages.

Certainly in a nation as divided at the USA, there should be a separation between the blue and red states. The Red states would greatly benefit since their economic prosperity wouldn’t be hindered by the socialists ideology of the Blue states. Of course without the red states the blue states would quickly become a socialist third world country.

[Guy13]

You are right on. The tyrants, whether Socialists or Communists want to own and control all Resources. People are resources except the Communist/Socialist who believe We the People should be depopulated and are draining the Resources that they want to monopolize. They can not be lived with as they thrive well in peaceful time or appeasement (Chamberlain). They love not Peace but War and Control. The key is Tyrant (s) whether it be individual or Committee. If the Entity violates basic Biblical tenets (shall not kill etc) and/or US Constitution then there is reason for concern.

[NaultD]

Ow god no. The United States has a finger in everyone's plate accross the globe. There's zero chance of a peaceful split within the United States. Our entire interstate highway is made and payed by the federal government just in case of an invasion or traitors to the American people.

Those interstate highway are designed to turn into runways for military operations supplie and troop drop offs. The traitorous Confederacy got out supplied from the lack of railroad. It will be 10 fold from day one. Then day two drone strike power stations (haha Texas) . Then day 3 surrender.

[Danzigdawson]

That's a good idea. Let all the racists, libertarian capitalists, conservatives, jesus freaks, white supremacists, gun nuts come together to build their own third-world country. I'm sure it will basically be heaven on earth. 😅

[Agagagagaga]

Dude they have poop patrols in San Francisco. The homelessness is so rampant people just shit in the streets.

I don’t think your liberal utopia will be the great place you imagine.

[Danzigdawson]

@Agagagagaga A problem of homelessness in country that promotes the most aggressive form of capitalism while insisting that any kind of governmental help to reduce poverty and inequalities is 'communism'? Dude, let's call Scooby-Doo and the gang. We've got a big, serious mystery on our hands.

[KelleyNice]

Whether they become far better off or end up in a hellhole should not be a great concern of yours. Except, if bad, maybe they learned a lesson, if good, perhaps others will do likewise.

Regardless, I appreciate your willingness to let them go their separate way.

[Danzigdawson]

You understand so many things. Satan bless you.

[Agagagagaga]

They shit in the streets. They have crews to go pick up the human feces and spray the sidewalk down with water. Never saw that in the South! Go move to California to piece of shit. Maybe someone will pick you up off the streets or wash what’s left of you off the concrete. It’d make my day that much brighter. 🌞

[Danzigdawson]

@Agagagagaga Look, I feel you bro. I'm personally well-endowed, but I can place myself in your shoes and imagine what it's like to have a small cock. However, being an angry conservative won't help you in any way in that department... it just won't add inches to your trouser snake, no matter how mad at liberals you get and how much blame you shift on them for your sorry life. Look it up on the internet, there may be hope. Enlargement pills are probably bullshit but there's always surgery, if you're willing to risk it. Hang in there 🙂

[Agagagagaga]

@Danzigdawson I’m not your bro, shit-stain. Go do something useful and get cancer.

[Danzigdawson]

@Agagagagaga 👍 Right away. Good luck with your small pecker, bro! 🙂

[Red_Arrow]

Definition of Socialism: "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole." Nowhere is religion mentioned, because Socialism is not a religion. Nor is Capitalism. You keep spouting questions that are shaped to fit what you are trying to push off on people. We are seeing more and more of this in politics! (Notice "politics" not "religion".) and I do not believe that you are a 13 year old girl. YOu are much more likely to be a political group trying to push your beliefs into the public in a round about, not honest, way.

[KelleyNice]

A religion by any other name is a religion, whether the belief is a God or an idea.

[Red_Arrow]

"A religion by any other name is a religion", But that does not make politics a religion.

[KelleyNice]

Perhaps, there is a better word, possibly politics, but the effect is the same. Religions have tortured and murdered to force others to accept their religion. Have not socialists and perhaps some capitalist done the same?

[Red_Arrow]

When "socialists and perhaps some capitalists" torture and murder to force others to accept their religion, it is because of their religion, not their political views. They will often torture and murder others to force them to live by their political beliefs.

[KelleyNice]

Whether you call it a religion or political ideology, the effect is the same.

[Red_Arrow]

In some cases, but why do you lie and call politics religion?

[Adaeva]

I believe the USA should have a separation into at least the red and blue state and perhaps a couple more separations such California and maybe Texas becoming independent countries.

[love_conquers_lust]

The socialist countries would fall behind the capitalist ones. However, the capitalist one would go through a split again when wealth inequality got out of control again.

The socialist nation would likely embrace capitalistic values at some point to break out if stagnation.

[Anonymous]

You're thinking about something a little different but I think it's a bad idea. It's been tried in a number of countries to varying effects.

My feeling is humans divided brings all sorts of problems.

People should not hide from our be frightened of other ideologies, religions or paradigms.

[OddBeMe]

Look at your map. How much federal money collected from Ny and California flows to the red?

Honestly though, it would be nice to save our liberal tax dollars from going down the drain. Long Live The Confederacy!

[love_conquers_lust]

How much of that revenue is pure ownership and local market inflation that brings no real value to our GDP besides a bunch of liberals sitting around huffing their own assholes arguing about who’s shit stinks the least? Like, 90%?

[KelleyNice]

*OddBeMe The map was just an example of what has happened. Perhaps a map of North and South Korea would be better.

[front2back]

If the US were to balkanize today it wouldn't be 2 separate countries with 2 separate ideologies, it would be more like 20 and maybe settle out at like 4-6.

[Plinko]

This is correct.

[888theGreat]

First of all map is wrong. There are more conservative red states than Blue Socialist states. If there was a New Confederacy , it would be 35 out of 50 states.

[KelleyNice]

The intent of the map was only to show an example of a separation. It doesn't not nor did I intend for it to represent modern day USA nor just the USA since it can be applicable to other parts of the world.

[exitseven]

It is a nice thought but the people from Welfarezania will end up coming to Capitalististan once the money fries up.

[007kingifrit]

i would rather fight a civil war. the blue states are weak and even in that area 70% of the land is held by the right wing, only the cities are blue. and cities cannot fight wars

[Cubus]

People flor left states like California or New York would still move to red states like Texas or Florida, as they do now.

[KelleyNice]

But they wouldn't be citizens and vote socialists.

[grega239]

I doubt they'd agree to a peaceful separation. The country would lose political and economic power.

[KelleyNice]

You are correct. Socialist would not agree because socialist are all about money and control. Without all the socialist crap, separated, the capitalist would become a greater economic power.

[grega239]

No.

Neither would agree to a separation.

[Ironic_Method]

It's wild how much misinformation people have about so many things here.

[SmokinAces2000]

It’s funny how the red states are labeled confederate states

[KelleyNice]

The intent of the map was only to show an example of a separation. It was not intended to represent modern USA. I' sorry you misunderstood my intent. Perhaps North and South Korea would have been a better example.

[SmokinAces2000]

It seems pretty accurate to me