The Great Break-Up of the United States

Is a 1998 prediction of civil war set to come to pass?

Professor Igor Panarin first made a prediction that the United States would break-up into smaller countries back in 1998, a time when the economy appeared strong. Ten years later in 2008, Panarin reflected on his prediction saying, " The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."

Today, however, the socioeconomic status the nation sits upon a far more complicated and precarious foundation than mere dollar signs. We are living in a time in which a play that is endorsed by major news networks can be shown night after night in New York City's Central Park depicting the assassination of the country's President. There is fine line between free speech and outright treason, and this play crosses that line. We are living in a time when a comedian who was fired for her depiction of beheading the President has now claimed that he and his family have bullied her, bringing her lawyer into the situation against him.

The hate and division in this country continues to grow between rational conservatives and left-wing reactionaries. The left, led by Hillary Clinton's rhetoric and Nazi collaborator George Soros' funding, continue to call for people to resist the president. Yet, what exactly are they resisting? A secure border? An immigration policy that keeps terrorists out of the country and avoids the turmoil taking place in Europe? A balanced budget? A smaller government? A reasonable tax code that the average citizen can understand without help from an accountant?

The country is in a very dangerous, divided place right now, many on the left even taking to the streets and on social media celebrating the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise (read article here). Some of the leftist celebrations have included statements such as:

  • "The only good fascist is a dead one."

First of all, the person who made this particular sign has no idea what fascist is. Fascism is government partnering with industry in much the same way as what we saw during the Obama Administration. Conservatives believe government should stay out of industry. The tweets continue though:

  • "That's a Shame but babies blown to bits at Sandy Hook was worse and Scalise takes money from @NRA."

This tweet is a reflection of the leftist narrative, to take shots at the Second Amendment right to bear arms. It is a right not a mere privilege, installed to protect one's family from tyrannical government and not simply for hunters. If this person had done research before posting such a tweet they would have realized that nearly every case of mass shooting involved psychotropic drugs. This includes Sandy Hook, the Batman shooter, and the Colorado shooter, just to name but a few, not to mention the 20 soldiers ++per day++ who commit suicide after returning home and being placed on psychotropic medication.

  • "If the shooter has a serious health condition then is taking potshots at the GOP leadership considered self defense?"
  • "If KKK supporter Steve Scalise dies, the shooter deserves a holiday, true leadership. Now the trumps, kush, and miller need to be transitioned."

As a conservative who is from the south, it makes my blood boil whenever I hear leftists promoting geographical stereotypes such as, if you are conservative in the south, you must be part of the KKK. I'm a southerner, yes; I'm a conservative, yes; I even had ancestors who fought bravely for the south in the War of Northern Aggression; but none of that makes me a racist or a member of the KKK. I believe as the majority of poor whites believed during that great war, that the Federal Government has no authority to tell the States what to do beyond the powers specifically enumerated to it in the Constitution as per the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Slavery was wrong, terribly wrong, but it was a spiritual problem that could only be solved by the Christians and churches of the nation, not by the Federal Government. The Federal Government getting involved in the issue only escalated the matter because it chopped at the root of States' Rights, causing the bloodiest war ever seen on the continent.

With the country so divided, it is not a giant leap to think states may begin considering succession. Texas toyed with the idea during the Obama Administration, and California has also suggested the possibility. Civil war may not be far off as there will come a time when fair-minded people will have enough and start to push back. The push back by Laura Loomer and Jack Posobiec may be only the beginning. If something happens to President Trump, it could be the trigger that ignites a full-scale civil war possibly much bloodier than the North and South War.

What's more interesting right now is that, at least for CA and other states in its geographic region murmuring about secession, I'm not hearing the "oh no, we can't let them do that!" that we tend to hear when Texas rumbles about it, or when the Civil War happened in the mid-1800s. I'm hearing a lot more of, "Well, let CA secede, then." And I don't think it's classical liberal-mindedness that backs it, but a genuine disgust with CA as a political entity. If CA left the USA, it is possible it might have net positive impact on the USA, from a Conservative perspective, simply by virtue of shifting Congress's and the Electoral College's balance so sharply. Plus, it would give a place for those who loathe the USA to move to and show their solidarity. That said, I think CA would be foolish to do it. I don't expect it to happen. But the funny thing about it is that, if they did...I'm not sure how many people in the rest of the country would want to STOP them.

Civil War won't happen. Unlike 1860's, the united states isnt as geographically split along ideological borders. Essentially liberalism is contained within cities while conservatism is contained outside. Cities lack one major thing- access to food, so if there were ever a liberal started civil war, they would starve themselves out pretty quick. Also they have no guns and no soldiers. The right wing has majority control over the individual soldiers due to some 60% coming from the south alone, and states like Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, etc having much more militaristic cultures. I doubt anyone in the military is willing to take up arms against each other and I say that as someone in the military. It would be like fighting with my friends from ROTC in college who just happened to go into a national guard unit instead of active. It won't happen, people will lay down their arms before that.

it'll end up in franchises and burbclaves just like snowcrash predicted :P

Agreed - The cities would starve themselves quickly but it's why small town USA was targeted by the Federal government for refugee dumps. These people will be told we're the enemy, that we intend to send them back to the shit hole countries they came from and take their cushy life (compared to their previous lives) funded by the US taxpayers - ie you and I. None of this is a lie, but you see the Federal Government is way ahead of everyone else. While Americans sleep they're placing their troops.
It's also why rural communities in particularly Caucasian areas high in patriots was targeted with the opiate "epidemic." Do you honestly believe that it was a coincidence that the highest numbers of people affected were young white males did you? Read the stats on it. These young men were some of the nations finest and able to hold out against a hostile Federal Force for ever. They reduced that threat exponentially. Basically a 9/11 has taken place every 3 weeks in rural America. And it's lasted for years now. We lost a lot, a LOT of soldiers.
Take a look closer at the movements of the Federal government. They're very methodical. I pray that the people wake up soon.

Would California be self sufficient? Water would be a real problem, as their portion of the old agreement for the Colorado River split may put SoCal in dire straights. They don't want to drill for oil, the don't want nuclear energy. Without water the San Joaquin Valley would not produce what it currently produces. Burning Coal or wood would provide a real pollution problem. And if they split from the rest of America, the state itself would split into 2 or 3 other states. The conservatives who do not live in the LA - San Fran - Sacramento areas would not agree to the conditions the left wing wants to impose on them. That would create a vast area where the free-loaders and illegals would drain the financial resources of the remaining liberal population. Without conservative tax dollars the left wing give-away programs fail, and they are overpopulated with too many unproductive members who kill their society. Let them leave.