I've thought this before. My only concern is that separately not everyone would be able to get what they need. People living in dry regions would have difficulty do to a lack of cultivatable land and lack of access to clean water. Also, from looking at the East I'd say having several small countries close together guarantees intense, constant war.
Would it not worsen if they are isolated into a small country?
Also, who would determine in what way the country divides in this hypothetical situation?
Been there, done that, fought a war over it. I don't think it's the answer now, either.
I really don't like the bit about dividing ba<x>sed on belief systems. Some of those "countries" might become like a Christian equivalent of Iran or worse Afghanistan under Taliban rule...
They certainly would! Texas and the South would be slaughtering non-Fundamentalist Christians by the thousands!
Let's not forget that some of those "countries" would now have nuclear weapons... Too scary for my blood.
Yes, but you aren't welcome here in Texas unless you bring $$ with you.
You mean the state with the best economy in the whole country? Carry on.
Actually, I'm writing a book on this. All forms of natural disaster occur at the same time and causes the USA to be physically divided.. but still politically together..<br />
And what you're describing seems unrealistic. What if my beliefs change? What if children have different beliefs? They will just move?
Why? Because the beliefs would be different? Also, they can start a war between the nation... We need a little something everywhere. That's why this place is called the Melting Pot. It enables us to be exposed to different things without fighting.
But by dividing us up based on beliefs, you'd be limiting the public to only their own... Thus creating some sort of Utopian society... But we all know that those end terribly.
Yes, this place has its flaws and problems, but we shouldn't try to cover them up with a quick fix. By confronting the problem holistically, we can solve the problem holistically too.
Interesting. Well said... But I have an important question. Will we be split up without the same president or will there be a president elected for each region?
Like states.... Except instead of location, they are divided by differences. But that can start a conflict. "Let's go attack so-and-so's region because that's where all the intellecuals are." It also goes for the people in that region. Everyone is different.. So to divide based on common beliefs is like putting a snake and rat in a cage because they're both animals. Which leads to my next question, exactly how would we divide people?
We wouldn't be able to defend ourselves against war since we would be so small and new... So, let me ask this... Would we still be together as one or just a bunch of places?
Well Divided we Fall... How would we defend ourselves if we are split up? Think of it. No means of contact, no relativity.. What would drive us to ever defend other regions?
Huff Puff... This is all very interesting... But one of us will have to back down eventually.. or at least shift the conversation if one is wanted.
It's coming. Texas will secede first. Then the South. Then the rest. There will be about 6 or 7 countries. I would say in 20 years or less. I expect Texas to go soon.
I think what Texas hates is paying taxes, but their taxes will be outrageous if they secede.
like north & south
I agree, but add the Rocky Mountain Zone, mostly a right wing country.
That will be a good idea. It will give a more comfortable environment.
Hope you all get new nations with better government.
That didn't really work out well last time.
Something to theorize about.
United we stand, divided we fall...