Is Secession Nigh? Many Young Voters, Blacks, and Hispanics Believe National Breakup Likely

By Selwyn Duke

In the early 1900s, philosopher G.K. Chesterton said he longed for one aspect of a time few pine after. In the Middle Ages, he wrote, people agreed on the things that “really mattered” (in Europe, anyway). Just two or three decades ago, psychologist John Rosemond contrasted his time with Chesterton’s and said that during the latter, “people’s values were explicitly the same” (in the U.S., anyway). Both were essentially correct, too. Just as medieval Europeans were more philosophically united than early-1900s Europeans, so were early-1900s Americans more united than today’s Americans.

And, in fact, some would say the division is reaching critical mass. Just recently, while advocating an immigration moratorium, commentator Tucker Carlson warned that we must “figure out what it is that holds us all together as a nation” so that “50 states [do] not become 50 countries.” Carlson isn’t alone in this sentiment, either, according to a new survey conducted by John Zogby Strategies. It found that not only are many Americans concerned about secession, but also something perhaps unexpected. To wit:

Large numbers of young people, blacks, and Hispanics also now share this concern.

The Divided States of America?

Reporting on the poll, the Washington Examiner wrote Wednesday:

Pollster Jeremy Zogby’s latest survey found that 41% of younger voters, 18-29, believe secession is likely, as do 39% of black voters and 51% of Hispanics.

… Zogby said that expectations of a national divorce by young voters are troubling. “This is key because this is the future of the electorate,” he said in a podcast with his father, pollster John Zogby.

The results come as other polls show growing expectations among voters of a politically-driven civil war as the Republican Party is winning fast-growing support from younger, black and Hispanic voters.

Now, what segment of the electorate most supports secession is influenced by who is in power. When leftist Democrats control the White House, conservative-leaning groups may be more amenable to a great divorce. And when Republicans (and Trump, especially) control the executive branch, Democrat-leaning groups start channeling Jefferson Davis. Yet the overall trend may be that support for secession is increasing with time. And for certain, the perception that we’re heading toward it is now widespread.

As to this, Jeremy Zogby found that 59 percent of Americans believe our country is drifting apart. Only 25 percent believe we’re coming together.

“There was the usual partisan divide,” reports the Examiner, “but also 65% of independents believe the nation is coming apart.”

Of course, many consider the notion that America could dissolve fanciful. As one MSN reader commenting on the Examiner piece put it, “The US is not splitting up. For all the differences we have, we have much more in common.” Yet as ex-intelligence man Ralph Peters wrote years ago, you can convince yourself that others are, mostly, “just like us.”

“It’s the differences that kill you, though.”

Vive la Différence? Maybe Not

And our differences sure are, well, different. The Examiner mentions our political divide having bred violence, citing in particular the recent attacks on Tesla vehicles and property. (This isn’t surprising. The “Left” was born of political violence and is responsible for most of it to this day.)

This division is fundamental, too. While approximately 25 states have now, post Dobbs decision, sought to defend life legislatively, about 25 others have defended abortion. Why, New York has even enshrined prenatal-infanticide “rights” in its constitution. Many states wish to cooperate with the feds in deporting illegal aliens, but many others aim to harbor them. Conservative states adamantly oppose racist schemes such as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); liberal states embrace them. Most significantly, traditionalist states are generally affirming that there are just two sexes and that men mustn’t invade women’s sports. And leftist states? They’re doubling down on the notion that a boy can become a girl just by willing it.

So as Jeremy Zogby astutely put it, “People are basically living in alternate realities.” Yet he, and his father, also blamed “both sides” for the division. But is this accurate?

Is Both Sides-ism Reality?

Let’s analogize the matter. Imagine a math “rebellion” is born, becomes prominent, and that its partisans insist 2+2=5. (By the way, our Left actually has claimed this could be so.) Now imagine this creates conflict, with, for example, the rebels stating this fantasy math must be taught in schools and “normals” opposing this. Furthermore, let’s say that each side represents 50 percent of the population. Each one also uses the same methods to advance its cause and is equally zealous. Would it then be reasonable to assert they’re equally to blame for the division?

“Wait a second,” you may say, “there’s a big difference. One side is merely defending objective (mathematical) reality, aka Truth; the other is attacking it. You’re not seriously equating activists advocating lunacy with people defending reality, are you?!”

Precisely. The problem with “both sides-ism” — which afflicts those mistaking relativism for even-handedness — is that it ignores Truth. It’s a bit like a news report stating, “God says the Devil is evil; the Devil says God is evil. We report, you decide.”

It may take “two to tango,” but two may tangle if just one is unreasonable. The onus always belongs, too, on the one denying Truth. In our situation, would that be the ones recognizing the sexual dichotomy’s reality, or those putting tampons in boys’ bathrooms because “men can menstruate”?

And what, the both sides-ists should ask themselves, is the “rightist” analogue to this leftist lunacy?

(Good luck finding it.)

All this said, could the U.S. really dissolve? Virtually no one in the 1980s thought the USSR would, do note, but it did less than a decade later. This was partially due to economic collapse, too. And this brings us to a theory ex-congressman Ron Paul once put forth. As long as the feds can meet their financial obligations (e.g., Social Security payments), he stated, we’ll remain “united.” But once they no longer can, that unitive carrot will be gone and all bets are off.

What seems for sure is that if a married couple were as ideologically divided as our country now is, a divorce would be in the offing — that is, if one spouse didn’t kill the other first.

                   This article was originally published at The New American.

Comments

[tj]

Mostly I think a national divorce would be nice. The caveat is that after all the shuffling around the new government might greatly resemble the old government.

PS: The larger part of Peters' career seems to have been post intelligence.

[bill]

while I wish we didn't have to go here, I think a national divorce or civil war are the only 2 choices left. i prefer the national divorce. The left can have their states and the right can have theirs. Use the Mississippi river as the dividing line. Have a free fire zone 300 yards wide on the dividing line, and shoot anything that moves. We've reached a point where we cannot share the same physical space.

[RealityIncoming]

Civil war is much more likely. The left has lost it, they won't take their toys and just go home, or make their own little tent cities again, because they can't support themselves, and they KNOW this. They'll just turn violent like they already are.

A conservative's end game may be, let's break away and start again, they'd be the ones splitting off
A dimwits / commies end game will be to burn the other side to the ground for not doing what I said.

[It's A Comin]

People say a divorce.
That simply can not happen.
there is no splitting the country, there is no 'seam' to split it on.
You can't split it down the middle, side by side, zig zag, whatever, because it's not as cut and dry as the north .vs. the south was.

What happens when you have to cross an 'enemy line' to get to another 'friend state'? Lets put up a great American wall around each state. Heck NY / NJ already have this with their stupid tolls and tunnel system.

While I agree that each state should run it's own show, and the Fed should stay out as much as possible, in reality it won't happen because the Blue children will bankrupt then if you don't give them the money they'll just invade and steal it. You are seeing it now.... even if there was some way to split sides up, both sides are NOT equal in resources OR ethics. Blue won't be able to sustain itself, will pilfer Red and well.... war is inevitable.

Like it or not, it's the only solution at this point, and the sooner it pops off, the faster it can be ended with the fewest casualties. What's worse is, you know what will finally END the civil war? Attacks from outside the US, destroying the US to the point where both sides HAVE to finally get along to survive period and fight off China and everyone else who hates the US and would love to tear it down.

[Ted]

Sad but true. There is no clear cut answer. Let’s take Washington state for example. The west of Wa is left as left gets, but the east is right minded, and for years has advocated a split for Idaho to annex. But even so, let’s take Georgia, as an example, you have Atlanta, Savannah, Lawrenceville and Thomasville. ALL leftist, cities. But the remaining portions of the state are deep red. California, still, same thing, red with a few dots of blue, namely Sacto, SF, LA, and a few others.

The solution of secession is not the easiest route. I suppose each state would vote on its direction, and once decided residents have the option to flee with 30 days notice or bebranded enemy combatants??

Maybe, so. The states would then have a clear division. The civil war was much the same way. Zit was brother against brother, father against son. Not everyone in the north or south agreed with the regional attitude.

[JOSEY WALES]

You people should read Kurt Schlichter's "Peoples Republic". It's a series of books about the splitting up of the United States into the Peoples Republic run by the Democrat Progressives/Socialist/Communist/LGBT whatevers where just about every perversion is allowed people are given the drugs of their choice for free, all power plants are closed for climate change and their are no privately owned properties unless you are an élite. Everyone is broken down into classes from the lowest a Class 1 to the highest a Class 10. Then those that rule over the rest their Class is so high it's not even mentioned.The People Republic is a Hell Hole worse than a Third world country. The United States on the other hand is prosperous, the only way to become a Citizen is to serve your 2 years in the military and receive your Citizenship pin and are able to vote. Crime is almost non existant as everyone is allowed to be armed. Nuff said.

[Tut80]

the time is right for division into at least two, if not more, independent nations, each following their own course as charted by their citizenry.

we are in the process of being shown what we now have is basically a govt that is for the few against the many and acting as if the few deserve all, the many none, with the legal system favoring the few. put another way, we are being shown the absolute unconstitutional nature of the ruling entity in virtually all it does, rendering the ruling entity criminal in its operation.

i am for division and a choice as to which type of nation i will live in based on its founding principles. this nation no longer satisfies such wishes long ago severing itself from the roots of govt of, by and for the people.