National Divorce? A Soho Forum Debate
Is breaking up the U.S. a good idea? Law professor F.H. Buckley and Libertarian Party activist Jonathan Casey debate.
HD DownloadOn February 21, law professor F.H. Buckley and Libertarian Party activist Jonathan Casey will debate the resolution, "The breakup of the United States into different regions is a workable option likely to bring a marked improvement in human affairs." The debate will be held at New York City's Sheen Center and hosted by The Soho Forum, which receives fiscal sponsorship from Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes Reason.
Taking the affirmative will be Buckley, a foundation professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School. He is a frequent media guest, a senior editor at The American Spectator, and a columnist for the New York Post. He is the author of the 2020 book American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup. Some of his other books include Progressive Conservatism, Curiosity and Its Twelve Rules for Life, and The Republican Workers Party.
Taking the negative is Casey, the founder and chair of the Libertarian Party Classical Liberal Caucus. He has worked and volunteered in the liberty movement for several years, specializing in communication. He founded the Classical Liberal Caucus to promote a professional and policy-based message from within the Libertarian Party.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Balkanization of the US is happening ideologically. Urbanites with some suburbanites versus the rest of suburbia and rural America.
More federalism would solve this. At its inception the United States were literally united independent states.
Devolve power away from DC, get rid of the FBI, CIA, DHS, Fed, etc. hand the military's assets to the state militias, a congress with a limited role overseen by a near figurehead president.
Then Alabama can have it's guns and God, and California it's fetal Soylent Green banquets and it will no longer be either's concern.
Except it will be someone else's concern because the social conservative/christofascist authoritarian wing of the GOP will not like it when a state next door lets loose women go and murder babies in utero and they want to use 'all US military assets given to the state militia' to save the babies and usher in Jesus return or whatever stupid shit they will come up with.
The rising stars in the GOP are proposing letting 'blue state' refugees in red states live and work...but not vote for 5yrs. These are not the best and brightest our country has to offer and those same idiots will be the ones running the red states so ya... hard pass.
Is the sky blue in your alternate version of reality?
He voted for Lightfoot.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,910 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,910 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link------------------------------------->>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
So, does the boogieman live under your bed or in your closet?
You'd be mistaken.
1) GOP-run states already allow abortion under special circumstances.
2) If Ukraine is of any indication, the Democrats are just as war-happy as Republicans, if not more so. If what you claim is true, The U.S. would've declared a holy war on Europe and several countries by now. But that's not the case; got an explanation for this?
3) Citizenship for any immigrant/refugee must be earned, not automatically granted. If immigrants want to become citizens, they must work their way through it like all others not born in the state.
4) A state based on preserving "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" will ensure that the "best and brightest" (your words) will run the country. This is what the Founding Fathers envisioned. The Democrats do not do this.
Anyone else wanna refute him?
He’s too far gone to actually bother. In a way his crazy vehemence is self-refuting. Windy obviously created his monster by consuming way too much MSNBC and Salon.
Besides, you did a fine job.
If it does happen, I have a suggestion: let people who own border parcels switch allegiance.
National Divorce?
No. We're a happy family and we're staying together even if I have to kill every one of you!
Pointless argument.
Look, before we can ask if the US should break-up, we need to agree on the framework of how it would break-up.
Simply put, we need an Amendment defining the process and procedures for states (or territories, or whatever Puerto Rico is) to leave the union.
If you don't have that framework in place, then any argument about if we should is either going to get bogged down in the details of what break-up would actually mean, or there would be a whole mess of unstated assumptions to that effect which (being unstated) would lead to all sorts of erroneous assumptions about what the other person means, making the whole thing pointless.
Unless you're talking civil war. But then, again, instead of talking about if we should have a Civil War II: War Harder, we'll get into ridiculous arguments about which side gets te military, which states are going to commit violent purges on their own citizens, whose preppers are more prepped, and so-on.
So yeah. Possibly interesting topic, but without the framework of how a "national divorce" would acall work, it's pointless. And "how a national divorce would work" is it's own topic, and would only be useful if it comes up with a consensus framework which, obviously, isn't going to happen.
False dichotomy, difference without a distinction, and advice on divorce from someone who, apparently, doesn't know anyone who's been through a divorce.
Local maximum for peak stupidity: "whose preppers are more prepped". One side has/had a youth organization with 'Be Prepared.' as it's motto for over 100 yrs. the other side considers "preppers" to be de facto right-wing.
The blues can have their precious city’s. The reds will have the farmland, water and power generation.
California and the Northeast could just import everything. They claim they won’t need fossil fuels after all, and I’m sure between rooftop solar, offshore wind, and urban gardens to supply their vegan diets, they will be just fine!
That mental separation is precisely why secession won’t work. The real political conflicts now are intra-state not inter-state. ALL states – and all individuals who vote DeRp – move their battlefield to the national level. They merely choose different issues to nationalize.
States themselves only exist as top-down (royal charters or federal territories) drawn lines on a map. Not one state was actually created as an instrument of self-government by its own people. Utah may come closest to a Mormon Galt’s Gulch.
This has been the source of legal conflicts and conflicting legal doctrines since about 1870 or so. IOW – right around the time slavery ceased to be relevant, we started a new base for conflicts between state incorporations and (mostly) municipal corporations.
The solution is not some pre-Civil War neo-confederate nonsense. The solution is to amend the Constitution to redo how a bicameral legislature should actually work.
To specify rules about when new states are carved out of existing states in order to get representation in the Senate (as self-governing entities whose legal systems should have their own voice to restrain the federal). And encourage states to disgorge parts of themselves if they just can't figure out how to live together.
As an aside – allowing for new states would also quickly provide a rationale for expanding the House as well to reduce district size and increase representation of individuals at the federal level.
Which would also restore one of the perversities of the federal level over time. Where a federal territory could become a state with a population of 60,000 (and thus get two reps) but a House district is now 700,000.
That was an awful lot of words to tell everyone you're a moron.
You need fewer.
You talk about carving out new states but this is really a strategy increase political strength at the national level. Why just make new states, why not take low population states and merge them? Why have two Dakotas?
So, were you trying to prove my point that if you skip discussions of process you just end up at chest thumping?
'cause chest-thumping is all you've got.
Did you even read his reply? He's calling it for the false dichotomy it is as well as calling out your false statements. Yet you believe the nonsense you type.
National divorce would be OK with me if we could separate the stupid-or-evil people for the neither-stupid-nor-evil people. Sad to say, it can't be done. I (and ??? 153,000 or so fellow sensible and benevolent folks, mostly live-and-let-live libertarians) am STUCK with ALL of ye stupid-or-evil-or-both people! Salts-of-the-Earth are precious and few!
The only type of Salt-of-the-Earth you are is synthetic cathinones like bath salts.
A better idea is to enforce the NAP and prohibit government from initiating force.
When you gonna get started?
I've been advocating for years.
Some US citizens want a country, others do not.
Start with that.
Some USA citizens want smug self-righteous authoritarianism, others do not. Some want to maximize (as much as is practical) personal freedoms.
Start with that.
Some think 'abortion' is the only definition of 'personal freedom'.
Start with that.
That and gay marriage. The only true freedoms, right Reason?
Right; Those Inherent rights to gov-status symbols. I’m a GOD and by force of Gov-Guns everyone must grant me that status-symbol.
I’m totally convinced it’s just a way to cheat immigration law.
Some think that 'small and limited government' means a government small enough to not only fit in your bedroom but also your uterus. Start with that.
On the contrary, it's about responsibility and the sanctity of life. You do not believe in either. Let small government make the judgment.
A fetus has NO 'inherent' right to life. It's an entitlement to someone else's reproduction system.
That day Democrats got their “Democracy” good and hard. And Republicans voided their Constitutional Premise (Roe v Wade) for Democrats "Democracy".
It actually hilarious in a way; but still sickening... 🙂
"Papers Please!" will fix shit ALL!!!
Oh you don't need papers while on private property.
You could just get shot for suspicion of purpose.
You could just get strangled to death for suspicion of intending to sell "loosies". Do NOT attempt to "garner" yourself some willing buyers in the "free market", w/o the permission of Government Almighty! Or else!
One of the VERY FEW responsibilities government has is to protect the nation from invasion… Get over your "everyone's" nation self-entitlement and narcissism. You don't get to call every place you wonder your own.
That's why Native Americans should tell ALL of the rest of us to "go back to where we came from"!
Humorously; They probably could've if they had a 'government' that protected their ?nation? instead of wondering around ignoring one of the very values of a government... Like what UR doing.
Africa?
Maybe the great intellectual SQRLSY thinks “Native Americans” evolved in the Americas.
They should actually go back to Africa as well. Then the Magic Fairies need to bring back the mammoths, mastodons, ground sloths, glyptodons, etc., who were the original inhabitants, depending on how far back in history you want to go. Dinosaurs? Trilobites?
Ya happy now?
This--
They should actually go back to Africa as well. Then the Magic Fairies need to bring back the mammoths, mastodons, ground sloths, glyptodons, etc., who were the original inhabitants, depending on how far back in history you want to go. Dinosaurs? Trilobites?
Ya happy now?
Is YOUR argument. No one else suggested it. YOU did.
I mean they tried, but seeing as they were outgunned and outgermed, they didn’t really stand a chance.
I may contact the Ukrainian embassy tomorrow and ask they provide financial aid to East Palestine, Ohio. Ukraine has plenty of money, talks about “people helping people” all the time and the Biden (D) administration is incapable of helping Americans.
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do....................>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Ok, let’s split it up now. I will negotiate for the Team Blue.
1- We get the US Dollar since we have the financial centers. You guys always wanted a gold-bugger currency so have at it.
2. We have 70% of GDP but Team Red will have most of the oil. That’s fair.
3- The debt gets split 50/50 since we are equally culpable. We’re not paying the massive oversized entitlements that go to Red States though. If you want to default go right ahead.
4. Military is split 50/50 but we get the Navy since we have the ports.
5- We keep the Constitution since you’re not using it anyway. You can copy one though and leave off all the amendments since you hate them.
6- No immigration. You can visit with a Visa. This time we will build a wall for real along the Mason Dixon Line.
7- Creativity – we keep Hollywood, NY City and most of the arts. You get to keep Nashville and Branson Mo. Fair enough.
8- You can’t unload Florida on us even when you cancel Social Security for all the old folks there.
5- We keep the Constitution since you’re not using it anyway
HAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!!
Reading between the gray "Comment hidden boxes" this seems like a weird statement coming from the side that openly professes activism and living document interpretations and openly despises originalism and textualism at literally all corners. And I mean *all*. Like "We give such absolutely zero shits about original meanings and text of any/all documents that we'll change the dictionary definitions, all of them, of the word 'vaccine' to fit our whims. We'll add 'offensive' and/or 'offensive definitions' to the dictionary days after someone uses the word or term to make it clear which (kind of) people's speech we don't like. That's how much we hate originalism and textualism."
I think the Civil War pretty much demonstrated how much the left loves the concepts of the Constitution and how far they will go to avoid them.
“3- The debt gets split 50/50 since we are equally culpable.”
You need to spit that per capita, not just 50/50, or else it’s unequal.
Actually it should be split by who supported and voted for it.
Well, they all voted for different parts of it. And as there's no hypothecation of taxes, so too, there's no hypothecation of debt either.
You will get some people saying that it should be in proportion to GSP, but that's only because a per capita allocation is tougher on less productive states.
Why not split it by acre? War/defense spending are about territory/resources. Medicare and SS spending goes to places where people move to - not paid taxes in
If you think every acre is responsible for the country's entire spending as opposed to mainly a small-area city sandwiched between Maryland and Virginia, then I got a bridge to sell to ya.
Do we get to vote by acre? I think you're on to something 🙂
“ 4. Military is split 50/50 but we get the Navy since we have the ports.”
No, military will be split proportionally to the country each serviceman chooses to call home.
The bars will be split 50/50
Everyone with a leaf or higher goes to the morxists, the enlisted stay with America the original country
"We’re not paying the massive oversized entitlements that go to Red States though."
I take it for granite you won't CLAIM to own the Red States (federal land) either then?
I'm I'm sure you'll take full responsibility for all the debt Team Blue voted in giving Red States entitlements? Oh lookie there; Team Red wasn't voting against their 'interests' after all... Geez; you leftards are dumb.
How about you go to prison for what you did and leave decisions to non-Jared types.
“We keep the Constitution since you’re not using it anyway.”
Oh fuck, I can’t believe that you have the balls to even say that after the last two years. The only use you guys have had for the constitution was as toilet paper.
I’ve never seen so much hate for the first, second, forth, sixth and tenth amendments as from your tribe in the last decade.
"I will negotiate for the Team Blue."
Zero surprises there.
Not a leftie. For real.
9 - "Team D" gets to retain womb control per the wishes of womb-owners, and "Team D" gets ALL of the unwanted fartilized egg smells!
“Team ??” gets to retain womb control..
Dude HELLO!... That' exactly what you got now (post Roe v Wade).. Majority state vote [WE] gang "team" control of peoples body parts.
Oh shit! I just noticed that I typoed! I meant... "and “Team R” gets ALL of the unwanted fartilized egg smells!"
(They should be happy with that, since they love the fartilized egg smells SOOOO much!)
I will negotiate for the Team Blue.
Of course you will, Pluggo, we all know you're a Democrat anyway.
4. Military is split 50/50 but we get the Navy since we have the ports.
Jacksonville? Charleston? Galveston Bay? Savannah?
I honestly didn’t think it was possible for you to get any more fucking stupid, but you’ve really outdone yourself with this post.
And where does that leave Team (I)ndividual? Can I opt out of all this BS?
Okay, you do that. I'll negotiate for Team America. I'll start. We have all the guns. This is not a negotiation. We accept your point 5. There will be no immigration, Blue areas WILL be walled up.
Thank you.
Goodbye.
IT IS broken up into 50-States.
But the conquer and consume party is leaving CA for TX so they can conquer and consume some more!
That is what ***National*** Socialists do...... It's not about enslaving just their own state; It has to be NATIONAL enslavement. The bigger pot of slaves the better.
They're not called the 'slavery' party for nothing; and nothing has changed in their motives.
The leftard leaches aren’t about getting their own way; they are about conquering and consuming someone else’s greener pasture.
As-if their endless pitching for MORE armed-theft (tax) for the ?poor? wasn’t a dead give away about how much leaching and looting they are after. Being the #1 Criminal-Gang is what the Democratic party *is*. And should be handled like a Gang; required to OBEY the US Constitution (Supreme Law of the land) else be jailed for ignoring it.
Could you imagine what the actual progressive country would look like and do? A couple of random islands bound by laws so permissive and looney they'd blow up whatever economy they currently have for equity.
A couple of random islands bound by laws so permissive and looney they’d blow up whatever economy they currently have for equity.
And then, per TJJ2000’s post, blame it on the surrounding States/municipalities the way Chicago blames its gun problems on WI and IN, the way CA enforces its emissions standards on states with nowhere near as many vehicles, the way NY, CA and others “banned” doing business with corporations in N. Carolina when they opposed Raleigh’s attempt to regulate private bathrooms, etc.... and then proceed to try and push regulation in those places.
I mean FFS, we have recording of US policymakers telling the Ukraine “Fuck the EU.” and the administration responsible, rather than apologizing and correcting course, doubled-down by attacking the leaker, tripled down on the corruption, and quadrupled down, now, on the aid and open conflict. For a shithole nearly on the other side of the planet with near zero US, or really global interest.
Heinlein had it right. There are people who are content with what they have and there are people who aren’t content unless they’re fucking with other people. Execute and bury the latter as they cross the property line seems the only workable solution.
"Could you imagine what the actual progressive country would look like and do?"
Europe?
You'd be mistaken. Any riches they got have come out of capitalistic economic gains. Take that away and they're screwed.
UK, New Zealand...? I believe we already have living examples of what a progressive island would be like.
And I want no part of them.
Truth be told there is already a de facto split in things like gun control and abortion where some states allow one but not the other and vice versa. Plenty of other examples like voting rules and high or low/no tax rates.
While I don't think there will be any type of official split where the military and national debt are apportioned to the two (or possibly more) sides I do see the de facto split getting even greater as some states move more in the direction of abortion on demand paid for by tax dollars as opposed to other states imposing even greater restrictions on abortions as one example; with guns being another.
While as Yogi said predictions are hard especially about the future the thing that concerns me most is we are running out of water and some other natural resources and the problem seems to be worst in the blue states.
LMAO… Only the leaders of Blue State’s can figure out a way to make water a limited resource while also having an entire shore of water all along it’s entire border. Wow; just wow… If they’re not complaining about falling into an ocean of water; they are complaining they don’t have enough water.
Bottom line; They think GUNS make everything; trying to milk a GUN for milk. Ya; that compulsive idiocy will get a whole lot of nothing but a pissed of nation.
Nah.
Look at the county-level election results for any presidential election in the last thirty years. Choose whichever you think was the most "de facto split".
Then look at the county-level election results for the presidential election of 1864.
That is what a de facto split looks like. We're far more integrated then any of y'all think.
Election results by county are misleading because land doesn’t vote. People vote and continuous cartograms are the best way to see how split we are. They have those cartograms (by population) on the wikipedia election pages. But plenty of other cartograms – eg by GDP
And the 1860 election is the one that shows the extreme of splits. And of course the consequences of said split.
Are you guys incapable of seeing the overall divide on how policies are run, depending on where you live? You two haven't refuted ragebot at all.
A. Live and let live
B. Kill or be killed
If one side rejects A, we're all thrust into B conditions whether we want to be or not.
+1000000000.. Well said.
Option C; Live and let die!
Massively shrink federal govt, get rid of over-reaching EO's, get rid of federal agencies.
Let states decide what they want.
This is the only way to move forward. CA doesn't want Desantis writing EO's for them to live by, and TX doesn't want Newsome's. Its time to stop living under tyrannical federal rules and let the states be independent. Much less blood this way.
So every State abides by its own constitution [or it's interpretation thereof] and the US Constitution becomes a guide; I honestly do not see each and every State, left to their own devices, equally respecting the same national constitution. Places like Florida, AK, MT, etc may well hold onto the original, but CA, NY, et al most certainly will completely replace it with positive rights [what the government gives, the government can taketh away] in some "living" format.
We would do well to have a common currency and defense. But the real sticky wicket I see here is that the divide in many places is largely along urban/ coastal and non urban; so OR, NY, CA will suppress their "deplorable" populations, and TX and MT will impose similar upon their resentful urban "elites."
If this is the outcome, I foresee a lot of people relocating, depending on what is most important to them.
People already started relocating years ago, with Californians who are tired of progtards ruining their state going to TX and AZ , and NYers/NJ going to Florida. Of course, woke kiddos in Nebraska or Alabama have long been fleeing for the big coastal cities the first chance they get.
Unfortunately those Californians moving to Texas think that electing people like Robert O’Rourke is a swell idea. Because it wasn’t the policies that didn’t work, just the politicians.
aren't we broken up into different regions by definition?
The ***National*** Socialists (syn; Nazi’s) think State’s are racist.
They also think the US Constitution (The USA by definition) is racist.
Obvious *reality*: They are a treasonous enemy trying to destroy the USA from within.
Sadly; They are doing a really good job at it.
We don't need a divorce. What we need is to start enforcing the Constitutional provisions that prevent the Federal government from imposing the dictates of the majority of the moment on everyone else. I live in a state where the 51% impose their whims on the other 49% but there are still enough swing voters to prevent the worst pf the socialist agenda from happening. The big cities continue their downward slide into third world status without the fallout spilling over onto the rest of us. So far the socialists have shied away from trying to leave their urban enclaves - I think they instinctively understand what will happen to them if they try it.
^^^ THIS is really good ^^^
Video is not working. Presumably all comments before this .....
You can find the video on YouTube
The pro-secession speaker. F.H. Buckley, really made little in reasoned argument and mainly providing grievances that might cause secession feelings. He never really addressed how the split could be accomplished. The anti-secession speaker, Jonathan Casey, really made the best point in challenging people to really think about the practical limitation of trying to create two or more separate countries with separate governments. This is why he won the argument as shown by the vote count.
There is no real economic force behind secession, simply people's feelings.
The foundation of USA talks of secession is; does a nation being over-taken by Nazi’s just hand over some of it’s land for the Nazi’s?
When in reality; everyone knows giving Nazi’s ?free? sh*t doesn’t even flirt with ending the battle. Just like giving into ransoms doesn’t. It actually *encourages* more of the same.
The conquer and consume National Socialists (syn; Nazi)..
It’s not a new battle; its one that has been battled with countless times.
Something about "It'll work *this* time!" .... Somehow, somewhere GUNS will grow resources all by themselves.
Decent people don't use GUNS (Gov-Guns) to gain resources. They only expect GUNS don't get to steal their earnings/creations. Nazi-criminals (as most criminals do) have spent years making excuses for their most basics of behavior.
The only tool in 'governments' toolbox is GUN-Force. That is what separates it from any other run of the mill business.
… And it’s EXACTLY why Democrats WON’T (Notice: I didn’t say couldn’t) start their ‘socialist’ membership/subscription business and enact every socialist policy they wanted; from Universal Healthcare to Universal Income…..
What they really are after is GUNS to STEAL resources from people. (i.e. criminals)
If the Federal government gave more power to the states, we wouldn't need a divorce. Live in a state that closely matches your ideals and politics.