Lind does have the tendency to go out on a limb but from an historical perspective, history has witnessed many nations fall apart by division.
The real crux of the article to me is, his accurate description of Congress. R's and D's after a name only serve to make us think there is a difference, when in fact, there is little to none. 99.9% of Congress are beholding to the monied class of America...it is the lifeblood of politicians. The average American has little to no impact upon the decision making process that cloaks itself as 'government' in the halls of Congress simply because we do not have the ear of a Congressman, nor do we have the money for those ears. We have no lobbyists championing the average American. What we do get are bones thrown to us at times to make it look like our Congress is taking care of business. A good example is the recent 'credit card' Bill...thanks for the 37% interest cap on credit cards! And the fee fiasco, the card companies can still stick it to ya. Basically, all they did was rewrap the same garbage of the past and present it to the American public as a job well done for America.
Until we demand, even if it takes going into the streets, that members of Congress can no longer take money from special interest groups, the system will continue to fail the majority of Americans. No money unless it is from an individual citizen and with limitations as to the amount that can be given. It is the only way we will save America.
The federal government was never intended to be this big. When the framers of the Constitution met in the summer of 1787 to rewrite the Articles of the Confederation, they intended federal government to only have limited powers such as national defense, immigration, issuing currency, raising revenue to operate the national govt, foreign relations, resolving conflicts between states, and certain other specific, enumerated circumstances.
The Tenth Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Federalism promotes decentralized government, which empowers the individual to choose whether to stay in one place and try to influcence the state and local decison making or to take up residence in another state or locality. The Constitution's interstate commerce clause had been hijacked to by the Federal government (Wickard vs. Filburn) and centralized governmental authority.
My opinion: Lind has a point about cultural lines, but America still lives geographically according to which culture is better for them. More and more people are leaving cities and moving to "conservative economical regions" in search of a better life for a reason. There is a good article in Foreign Policy Magazine by Robert D. Kaplan on the importance of geography in future world politics.
I believe conservatives and liberals will live where it is provides them strength in numbers and support structures for their ideologies. Independents/moderates will have to make a decision. As far as 4GW goes geographically, a study on the amount military strength/resources of "Red States" vs. "Blue States" would be interesting. Of course geography (key terrain) would important to the equation.
As far as Lind's "New Urbanism seeks to build new villages, towns and urban neighborhoods as alternatives to suburban sprawl, an essentially conservative endeavor", this sounds a bit like fascist social engineering and doubt a conservative would like this at all. Conservatives and libertarians are more inclined to live lives they way the want according to the Constitution's "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." They might be willing to live in new urbanism for safety reasons on their own choice, but not forced.
It may yet prove time for President Davis to think of returning to Richmond, and for New Urbanists to design some good castles.
This guy, is nuts.
I don't think he's nuts. I think he's right on target. IMO, the United States is headed for a melt-down that will lead to a total and violent collapse. It's been coming for years and it's about to reach the boiling point. I forsee warfare in the streets of America's cities. There will be food riots, day light robberies, and wanton murders on an unprecedented scale. It won't be geographically based, at least not at first. It will be racial, with blacks, browns, Asians, and whites pitted against one another. Most Asians and whites will form alliances to combat blacks and browns. Hundreds of thousands, more likely millions will be slaughtered before it's over. Eventually the US will be Balkanized. In his book, Defensive Racism, Edgar Steele forsees an Aztlan that stretches from the Mexican border up through the Pacific coastline across northern California which will include Colorado, Oklahoma, Western Texas, Arizona and New Mexico. Most of the south, with its large black population will become a country unto itself "New Africa". Some of the midwestern states and the Pacific Northwest will become safe havens for whites and some Asians, primarily those of Korean and Japanese descent. When the US collapses it will create catastrophic change in the entire world, but you can be sure that no other country will intefere in the domestic affairs of the United States. Why do think the sale of guns and ammunition has skyrocketed in the past few months? It's not just because Barak Obama is POTUS. It's because millions of Americans are looking into the future and it's a bleak and frightening scenario. Those who live in the cities are pretty well doomed. Call me "nuts" but I'd rather be "nuts" and be prepared.
But your "thesis" is biased towards the ludicrous, it assumes and possibly suggests that a race war is not only certain but that we should actually prepare for it?
Originally posted by Weatherguesser: Then so you shall be.
But your "thesis" is biased towards the ludicrous, it assumes and possibly suggests that a race war is not only certain but that we should actually prepare for it?
And oh, by the way?
The future, is yet to be written.
I do believe a race war is imminent, and therefore it would be ludricous if I did not prepare for it. Semper Paratus (me and the US Coast Guard)
Originally posted by Weatherguesser: Then so you shall be.
But your "thesis" is biased towards the ludicrous, it assumes and possibly suggests that a race war is not only certain but that we should actually prepare for it?
And oh, by the way?
The future, is yet to be written.
Well, at least I won't have to worry about you; you'll already be dead.
