This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Ambitious Plan To Break California Into 6 States – A Model For The Future?
Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
The more I’ve thought about potential solutions to the gigantic mess we have found ourselves in as a species, the more I have come to believe we need to break apart into a vast multitude of city-states. The revolutionary concept of America in the first place was this idea of “self-governance,” something we do not posses an iota of in this day and age. As was noted recently in an academic paper published by Princeton and Northwestern, these United States have mutated into nothing short of an oligarchy. In fact, the study demonstrated that the will of the people has essentially zero impact on legislation whatsoever.
In centuries prior, the idea of “representative-democracy” in which people elect people to represent their interests in a far off capital seemed like a reasonable solution to a very real problem. Information took a very long time to get from one place to another, so you had to trust someone else to essentially negotiate for you on issues of national significance. Moreover, in such a disconnected world, centralization was not only more efficient, it seemed like the only way. As such, things became highly centralized, so much so that things have now morphed into a global oligarchy that wields almost total power. Meanwhile, the billions of plebs have no say whatsoever in the affairs that govern their lives; including whether they will be financially secure, posses any civil liberties at all or end up in jail for a wide litany of non-violent “crimes.”
With the incredible tools we now possess, thanks primarily to the Internet, we no longer need centralization of government. Nor do we really need representatives to vote for us on the issues that most greatly affect out lives. As any American understands, the diversity of cultural, economic, and political sentiments vary greatly throughout the land. It’s not just the obvious ones, such as the differences between “northerners” and “southerners,” but wide discrepancies exists within states themselves. For example, Austin is nothing like much of the rest of Texas, and the Denver/Boulder area where I live is very distinct from much of the rest of Colorado. The examples are simply too many to list, but I am of the belief that people are capable of, and should be free to, decide the most important things that affect their lives at a local level (with the exception of obvious things such as violence or aggression toward one another).
The founding fathers’ original idea of many “United States” allowed for different ideals to be expressed in a wide variety of ways, and is in my opinion one of the most advantageous attributes of our nation. But why stop there? Why not allow different areas and municipalities break off even further into far more autonomous type structures than we have today?
Of course many people will answer, what about slavery? The truth of the matter is that this abomination in the United States seemingly had to be resolved through a bloody conflict given the economic interests in the south at the time. The founders decided one war was enough, and let this horrible practice be tackled almost a hundred years later through violent conflict. I hope that we have advanced enough as a species that we can come to a global consensus that certain things are illegal everywhere. Slavery, murder, rape, etc. Other than these (and other) obvious evils we can all agree on, decentralized legislation seems to make sense to me in this day and age. While I strongly disagree with “global government” a global consensus on certain things we can all agree upon as reprehensible anywhere on earth seems completely reasonable.
With that in mind, the man who recently purchased the entire 30,000 Silk Road Bitcoins from the feds has proposed to break California into six separate parts. The measure has already collected “far more than the 800,000 signatures” needed to to get it on the state ballot.
Like Hollywood or Manhattan, Silicon Valley occupies a singular place on the American cultural and economic landscape. Unlike those other locales, however, the Valley’s more idiosyncratic political leanings have led to murmurings of secession more typical of rural hinterlands that already feel cut off through sheer physical isolation. That chatter has culminated in a measure that appears headed for the statewide ballot to split California into six separate states, of which Silicon Valley would be one.
While ostensibly a plan to make the entire state of 38 million people more governable, the six-state initiative is being led and funded by a member of the Silicon Valley elite, many of whom would no doubt welcome the increased political clout that would likely come from carving out their own statehood. In the hands of most, the six-state initiative would look like a pure stunt. But with Silicon Valley behind it, this effort’s chances at the ballot box can’t be dismissed out of hand. Unlike most other would-be revolutionaries, Silicon Valley has a long record of taking ideas that sound outlandish at the time—affordable computers in every home, private rocket ships—and managing to make them real. It also has a seemingly endless stream of money that, combined with heavy doses of ingenuity and shamelessness, give its goofball ideas the fuel they need to take off.
Leading the six-state push is Tim Draper, a wealthy third-generation venture capitalist known for his theatrics. He hosts the superhero-themed Draper University of Heroes, a kind of motivational cram session for would-be startup entrepreneurs, and once wore a Captain America costume himself on a magazine cover. Last month, he bought nearly 30,000 bitcoins auctioned off by the U.S. Marshals Service after authorities had seized them from online black market Silk Road. In short, he’s exactly the kind of guy with the time, money, and temperament to push a wacky-sounding ballot measure.
“Our gift to California is this—it’s one of opportunity and choice,” Draper said at a press conference yesterday where he announced the campaign had collected far more than 800,000 signatures needed to get the measure on the ballot. “We’re saying, make one failing government into six great states.”
The campaign in favor of the measure argue that six states will mean six state governments more responsive to local concerns, rather than the unwieldy process of orchestrating the state’s 158,000 square miles entirely from Sacramento.
With the six-state proposal, the Californian Ideology appears to be seeking out its final, fullest, most ironic realization by underwriting Silicon Valley’s emancipation from California itself.
And why wouldn’t Silicon Valley seek to be free? Through the lens of its own sensibility, at least, California looks like the worst kind of incumbent, an ancient and inefficient institution mired in old ways of doing business, a monopolist that holds onto power through manipulation, not innovation. To six-state supporters, holding onto the idea of a single California represents, at best, an irrational sentimentality, a commitment to the past grounded in lazy logic and unexamined assumptions. Breaking up California is exactly the kind of “disruption” that titillates the venture capitalist imagination. In the process, the new state of Silicon Valley—which would stretch from San Francisco to Monterey–would also, conveniently, separate its great and greatly concentrated wealth from the poorer parts of the state.
The Valley’s “hacker way” has so far proven a clumsy fit for the strategic complexity of the political process, which relies more on realism than idealism. Before California would officially break up, per the U.S. Constitution, the existing state legislature would still have to sign off, which it’s unlikely to do for a host of reasons, not least being the tax revenue lost to Silicon Valley seceding. Congress would also have to approve what would amount to the dilution of its own power by granting California twelve senators instead of the current two.
At this point, I’d like to make it clear I don’t think this will become a reality in the near-term. In fact, it is likely that decentralization will first occur in the economic and technological areas of human society way before it happens on the political level. The reasons for this should be obvious.
We are already seeing decentralization take over in all sorts of economic areas. Information flow in general and alternative media specifically, currency (Bitcoin), transportation (Uber, Lyft), and manufacturing (3D-printing). When the political process fully implodes in the West, we’ll look to decentralized successes in other areas and apply them to politics.
I believe the current overly centralized paradigm parasitically engulfing the planet will experience a series of spectacular collapses in the years ahead that will make 2008 look like practice. As the centralized beast episodically implodes upon itself, we will have a historic chance to remake our world in a new way that will better serve humanity. That new paradigm will consist of freedom through decentralization, and I can’t wait to see it.
In fact, it’s already started.
For recent articles on our generation’s most significant battle; Centralization vs. Decentralization, check out the following articles:
Ex-CIA Officer Claims that Open Source Revolution is About to Overthrow Global Oligarchy
Networks vs. Hierarchies: Which Will Win? Niall Furguson Weighs In
»
- 35500 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Sorry tyler, Slavery was a fascist institution, requiring the active support of the state to bring back runaways and enforce slavery contracts.
It disappeared in all of the western world , non violently , as slave labor proved seriously uneconomic in the age of machines.
Lincoln emphatically stated that the war was not to end slavery , but to maintain the union without consent of the governed states.
The South was being economically raped by the cotton tarrif , so it is no accident that the alledged forst shot was upon federal custom tax collectors holed up in Fort Sumpter.
Fort Sumter, please, though it is pronounced like "Sumpter".
The Central Valley's water would come from the State of North California? War within a year?
Those folks up in Jefferson and North Kali will have to figure out how to tally up the weed taxes. The Emerald Triangle sits smack dab in the middle of them.
did you see that, YC?...you hate janus and he up-arrows you anyway. that's what we call character.
i think i want to found the emerald triangle's capital city...cough-cough-cough -- i reckon it'll look something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC871hNBig4
the good witch of the north sent me,
janus (a horse of a different color)
Folks here in Jefferson tend to cut out the middleman and transact "Tax Free," for the most part. It's more efficient.
And there's places back in these woods where it's best not to get out the camera.
If the federal government were not such a bloated piece of shit, this would be great. As it stands, 10 bonus senators from California trying to tell me what to do sounds like more hell.
None of these ideas to break up states will work unless you stop the break up of families and unless you give back to individuals the responsibility of being responsible for themselves far more than they are now.
I don’t hear any mention of the immense corruption in Sacramento. That California is a Rothschild state. No reference of the anti-human Agenda 21 being implemented here at breakneck speed. Tim Draper? Don’t know the guy. But I can pretty much guarantee that he is an asshole front for the Global Syndicate. California is already being broken up into City States as evidenced by the One Bay Area Plan. Pretty soon I expect that there will be Warlords administering locals and regions; running the opium fields, distributing the water, charging you to drive on the roads we already paid for. Time for Ken Lay (Kenny Boy) to come back from his hide-out at the Bush Ranch in Paraguay and get in on the action. Just call it New Afghanistan.
California is already being broken up...
If I'm not mistaken, we, (CA), are the poster child for gerrymandering. I can't imagine this idea gaining traction unless and until all the investments made to secure our Judaizing representatives continuing to "represent" US / CA citizenry are well entrenched / ensconced in the new regime.
jmo.
Its a trap. UN Agenda 21 requires mega sized local councils and a centrally planned "nation" via a federal government - states are a pain in the ass. Australia is an Agenda 21 poster kid and former PM Gillard advicated super councils and the removal of state governments.... do you think she thought that up by herself? Wonder why the "local" council plans in the USA, Canada and Australia look the same -obviously cause they are NOT local.
In an ideal situation...
The fed would give power to the states
The states would give power to the counties
The counties would give power to the villages/cities
The villages/cities would give the power to the people
Everyone would be responsible for themselves. We would all act as sovereigns but agree, in accordance with the Constitution, that only gold and silver can be used in the repayment of debts from the state to the fed. States, counties, whoever could use whatever they wanted as it related to currency but the feds would require gold and silver and their only role as it related to money should be insuring proper weight and measures of said metal. Nothing else. No central bank. No IRS. Eventually all paper currencies would be based around metals simply out of common sense - other currencies may be based off of other currencies but all would relate back to PMs in the same way dollars are internationally today.
In a system this decentralized ideas, great ones and horrible ones, would florish across all the different villages but ultimately the best ideas would win out or at least communties would find peace in their differences. People would divide themselves on purpose and life would be more peaceful. Wars near impossible to fight.
^
I believe this was the original vision for America and then we went and screwed it up by emiting bills of credit and forgeting gold and silver had to be used in the repayment of debts. That is the foundation for all of it (It's why the convention was held - the Articles of Confederation collapsed under the weight of the Contential currency). Sell your paper and stack silver people because it's still the achilles heal.
1913
1933
1971
2001
These were the death blows to our foundation. We can still save it if we try... the Ron Paul's of the world have never promised a utopia and i'm certainly not now but by God look where we are headed? We have to stop the machine and we have to stop it now. Just fucking stack the bloody silver and burn the fucking markets first!
In an ideal situation...
The fed would give power to the states
The states would give power to the counties
The counties would give power to the villages/cities
The villages/cities would give the power to the people.
You got that upside down, let me fix it for you:
In an ideal situation...
The people would give power to the villages/cities
The people would give power to the states
The people and the states would give power to the fed
lets just get it over: sell the states to the international corps, cali could be sold to bill gates foundation, he could call it gates estates...buffett could buy michigan and call it burkshire farms..GE gets NY, and they can call it little tellyvive,, and so on and so forth until the banks buy it back.
Truth be told, the United States should be divided up into 6 or 7 different nations. The United States, as it exists now, is too large for a single body to govern. The disparate regions are too different to be ruled by a single central government. It is simply impossible for a small coterie of representatives in Washington to effectively govern nearly 400 million people spread across the United States. At a minimum, we need 6 or 7 autonomous regions with an overarching central government .... but I would simply prefer 6 or 7 independent nation-states.
Not doable, they'd have to bribe 7 times as many legislators. Too expensive for our owners.
Expense is a relative term. Sure, in the short term, dividing the nation into various autonomous regions or even different nations would be expensive. But in the long term, it would be economically beneficial, as we would avert a major civil war. I foresee the United States in a massive civil war within the next decade or two. And I think that if we were to act now, such a war could be averted. Sure, parceling the nation into different regions or even different nation-states would be expensive. But I think that the cost of doing so would pale in comparison to the coming civil war. If you think that the civil war of the mid-1800s was bad, you better think again. Imagine the lossof life and the desecration of the land that would result from a modern US civil war. It would make the Civil War of the 1800s look like child's play in comparison.
Yes. But, with 7 additional central banks, think of the possibilities.
at least 2.....
The southern region can be a confederation of sorts...a confederation of states
Just in an initial assessment, I would say there should be 7 regions:
1. Southeast
2. Northeast
3. West Coast
4. West-Central US
5. Central US
6. East-Central US
7. Outlying territories (AK & HI)
let's break it up into 1) Dry, 2) Really Dry and 3) Wet. We'l have a Eureka moment then!
The solution is never government. Not ever.
i nominate this best ZH post of the year!
janus doth hereby -- and most earnestly -- endorse the views presented in krieger's brilliant piece.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnboZTs0ZXw
put your hands on the wheel/
let the golden age begin,
janus
Jefferson!!! :P
I have relatives that live in Redding and they support breaking up the state 100%. They're sick and tired of having their voice essentially mean nothing and there has been a lot of talk lately about bringing back the State of Jefferson. And I don't blame them.
California is eventually going to become Balkanized. The question is not if, but when.
J..e..f..f..e..r..s..o..n, here I come,
right back where I started from.
Fuck Mexifornia.
How long after this happens before we have a shooting war over water.
#41
..That piecemeal approach works until one of the states invites the Chinese to bring troops in and set up shop..
I doubt this left coast flight from fantasy will make it further than the high speed rail from Gangland to Fagland idea did, but I've been wrong before concerning the overall lack of sanity and single minded dedication to the absurd that flows like a golden river from Sacramento leaders before, usually from giving the jerks the benefit of doubt.
..they should retire that bear on the flag and replace it with a unicorn.
We will get the demo done on Clownafornia and possibly America as well, but after the razing stage we are going to get anyway, I doubt there will be much left to work with.
Imagine the new Constitution for the Bay District.
Yes.. great idea flood the zone with more HOR and Senators.. especially from behind the fruit curtain- punch it Thelma...we're almost there and it won't be long now..
I say give everything from Sacramento south to the border back to Mexico.
Fuck Mexico! You can have that piece of shit land with no water that we stole from you BACK!
Yeah, if they are still states vassal to Washington DC, does it matter?
I should so get my ass out of California ... before it's too late.
Von Luger: Are all American officers so ill-mannered?
Hilts: Yeah, about 99 percent.
Von Luger: Then perhaps while you are with us you will have a chance to learn some. Ten days isolation, Hilts.
Hilts: CAPTAIN Hilts.
Von Luger: Twenty days.
Hilts: Right. Oh, uh, you'll still be here when I get out?
Von Luger: [visibly annoyed] Cooler!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6_Wyt7Pf8U&sns=em
For the scrounger his special brand of herbs and spices will be sorely missed.
BEFORE 9/11, there was a growing California secessionist movement, (how many states do we want to be? how about ZERO?) and for years there was the traditional 2 state split, somewhere along the tehachapis. this has been debated for years, along cultural and economic issues. there is also the notion of a cross border region, with mexico, extending several hundred miles both north and south of the current border. a free enterprise zone. now this guys idea looks like a bad flowchart from the onion. the upper mojave is part of LA, central california extends all the way to the coast. one thing to consider this gives conservatives a region more gerry mandered to their purposes. NoCal is definitely Conservative, as is So California, and probably Central California, its only a few large population centers that make California a blue state. and SF and Silicon Valley are political opposites, but if you include that lower part of the coast there might be enough conservatives to dominate that state as well. bottom line its a conservative voters dream
There might be something to this idea of having 6 Californias, and breaking up large states into smaller ones.
Think about it. We have had 50 states and DC for so long, that the lobbying crowd pretty much has it down pat as to who they can lobby, how much money they need, and who they need to suck up to.
Now, if we broke up every large state into 2 or 3 pieces, then there would be even more parasitic legislators, and maybe even multiple parties may have a chance. And, it would be harder for all the lobbyist to keep track of all the lawmakers, and have meetings with everybody. There is only so much time in the year, after all.
More senators and congresscritters would lead to even more gridlock, and nothing would get done. That way, they can't fuck anything else up. If we had 200 Senators, and 1200 representatives, then you'd have so many idiots, even John McCain would look good, and Pelosi would be just one in a hundred morons.
Just think of the Sunday talk shows. You would not have 3-4 shows on Sunday, you'd have 25-30, because every Congresscritter would want to state their viewpoint.
Priceless !
Why break it up? Just hand it to Mexico in one lump sum.
well at last one of the bushes running for president can finally carry california, or one of them
The best part of this idea is when California breaks up into six states, there will be six times as much fresh water as before.
Ok folks, who's going to foot the bill for all the IT infrastructure changes...but then again maybe that's part of the plan as it would run into billions to seperate into 6 states...lol...want some more glitches...it's been a while since Healthcare.Gov has it not:)
This is old news; I'm from the north part of California and we've always talked about breaking up with the south part. I've called everything south of Santa Cruz "South California" for years now.
The problem of course is that N Cali has all the water and S Cali has all the votes. There are a lot of water users in the north who resent that the south gets "our water" essentially for free. Not to mention the south has all the freaks and the north would rather not be associated with them.
But it will never happen. The south likes the current situation, and as I said they have all the votes. End of story. About the only way a split will happen is if the south part of the state falls into monstrous chaos (many reasons that might happen, including climate change, which is killing them) and cannot drive enough voters into the polls to shift things their direction. Then just about anything could happen, but only in time for the 15M people down there to hit the road heading north. So nothing would be accomplished; the freaks would just move in and take back everything they lost.
Cali is in for a tough time. The FSA is going to come unglued one of these days. I just hope they are too fat and diabetic by then to waddle too far north and cause me trouble.
The U.S. should be fragmented so Bloomberg can run the show from New York. What is good for Iraq, Libya, India former USSR is good for America. They goyim must be fragmented and thrown into chaos so the chosen can rule.
It's hard to compete with 50 united countries isn't it? The Euros tried uniting but bitchez can never get along.
No serious trader wants to give Mexico back. The whole place is under an ocean of silver deposits. Think Taxco water pitchers.
This is the solution Putin wants for Ukraine but not for Russia where he centralised control over regional governors. It is the proposal in Scotland because England has failed to provide Home Rule in Ireland, India 1935, and the situation has always resulted in Independence being the end product.
Political Power requires central Control and they will exercise it however they can just as in the EU....using the currency and central bank. The US used to have regional prime rates and the NY Fed was not the only game in town
I think Timmy got his hands on some of that insane cali weed.
Sackamentos controls the Water end of story.
Anything today's politicians come up with is unlikely to be good for Americans. Good for illegals, yes. Good for Americans, no.
All for decentralization. But this will never happen. Breaking up states means the debt gets defaulted on. No state is going to take an apportioned share. They just say "Sacramento contracted the debt, go get it from them."
What really needs to happen is breakup of large cities. Detroit is a perfect example. Should break up into neighborhoods
I'm also for applying the original population ratios to the House of Representatives. I figure that means 20,000 congressmen. Then lobbying becomes pointless. And maybe parties or caucuses would form on idealogical bases, not welfare trough feeders like now (corporate or otherwise
There is no debt.
Well yes there is just the money that does not exist ;-)
I have some observations to throw into the mix:
If some of these things come to pass (brown outs, Asian invasion) the whole thing may organically break apart on its own, without a "plan" per se. I think what I am trying to say is that this is big government style thinking, trying to impose, top down, something on everyone. Local contingencies may not let this shake out as proposed very well.
Obama would possibly be residing in a Red conservatitve state if he buys his dump in Rancho Mirage.
Bitcoin is the most powerful tool the peasants ever had. :)
Cool plan... unless you are poor. When the poor realize that they're about to become even more destitute, the Dems will lead them and the measure will be crushed.
While there is prosperity in the US, there will be unity. When the prosperity goes, so will the unity.
California should get rid of the Fed, and become a sovereign country.
The first communists country state - oh wait it already is that
If this were to happen I would have to buy 4 different fising license to fish in my current favorite locstions instead on only one. One in state, and 3 expensive out of state. Fuck that. I am sure Hunters will fare just as bad. Bay area people who travel the state for sports will get fucked over.
Imho, as long as USD is the reserve currency, the scenarios of self-destruction are moot, as the government will just print its way out of trouble , as its happening now.
When/if the USD loses its reserve status, well, it will be singularly unimportant what exactly happens, or rather when all happens at the same time as the Ponzi scheme crumbles.
That's just five more bankrupt states
With two Senator given to each state this becomes a deal breaker. Government is seldom logical. The way in which an increasingly better educated world population faces and deals with growing governments will determine the future of the Planet Earth. The saying "be careful what you wish for" may again be proven true by those wanting big government.
Those wanting more government intervention will at some point be forced to recognize the limits of government and bureaucracy while at the same time seeing the true financial cost it imposes. The reality of ever-larger government has manifest itself in more scandals as departments overreach such as with the IRS and NSA or failures to accomplish task such as putting together a working and functioning Healthcare web site. The article below delves deeper into flaws in big government.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/11/flaws-in-big-government-concept.h...
Well, I think that Texas could be broken up into eight states.
Six governments where there used to be one? Have they thought this through?
More employment of high priced bureaucrats -- goood for economy!
Thinking about this more, I should not have given a flip answer. Each state has different issues and problems, but there are common problems too, such as water. The states should have shared departments for many of its services, which would save money. We can't begin to address this here.
Of course they have.
'Americans' are duplicitous. Decentralization is their new buzz word. It appeals on the fallacy that 'americans' are losing power. 'Americans' do not lose power, they are powerful as never but despite their power, they cant solve the problems they've created and their usual buffer used to soak the shit for 'americans' are nearing exhaustion.
The idea behind, true to 'americanism', is indeed not decentralization but reshaping the current situation and redefining who belong to the center and who belong to the periphery.
The center has grown too large for the periphery on global scale, the 'american' solution is to bring a larger periphery by pushing people who used to belong to the center toward the periphery.
'Americans' know only a few things: one is concentration of wealth. The center drains its wealth from the periphery, that is the famous 'american' produce more than consume. By increasing the size of the periphery, the new center will buy time in this 'american' world.
And Florida can be broken up into about four or five states.
So the blacks and mexicans go where? LOL.
Well, in Texas, where gerrymandering is an art, the Mexicans will all be in a state comprising the Rio Grande Vallley and San Antonio, which will be carefully carved out of the high value Eagle Ford area. They will still do allright considering the agricultural growth there, but without the oil, condensate, gas and gas liquids produciton.
Never happen.
Kind of makes sense. But gives too much power to idiots in government.
The Feds would never go along.
Cases can be made for NY, FLA, Illinois, Michigan in the same realm if so.
But no.....not in our lifetimes....
Maybe after the apocalypse.....
but no........
But there's supoz to be united states of canada americia mexico followed by a one world government....and then there's the issue of the antichrist's arrival.
While we are at it, why don't we merge some states:
VerMaineShire
Marydel
Alassippi
Greater Dakota
Wyomontana
Nebraskan
Arklahoma
Arklahoma - that is wrong on levels yet to be and hopefully never known.
Pure Bullshit!!
1st problem: Idea led by billionaires. How could they possilby have the common mans interests in mind? Most likely they see opportunities to become mini oligarch or some position of power.
How is this decentralization??? Ok, so you're going to break up and get away from the central monstrosity in control now. Where does it say anything is going to change other than there now being 6 states? Where does it say they'll secede from the union? 1 state or 6 states you're still slave to the clowns in DC.
If anything this is about Power and Centralization. CA is huge, out of fucking control and flat ass broke. So let's break it up into small bite size pieces WITH 6 GOVERNMENTS INSTEAD OF 1 so we can get this large mass of disarray under BETTER CONTROL. Not to mention BK out of the debt in the process.
The whole problem is that CA is on more of a path of decentralization in it's current state than it would ever be with this idiotic plan.
The 800k people signing this is nothing more than the pychological mind fuck of thinking the grass is greener on the oher side. In reality congrats because each state will want it's own huge militarized police force, some fuckhead billionaire will be at the helm, and as usual your vote won't mean jackshit.
Unless the peons themselves standup to make changes you can take any ideas from the rich and throw them in the goddamn trashcan.
Not yet formated?
This is decentralization because 'americans' want to call it decentralization.
The idea of substituting one centralized state with six centralized states is paramount to decentralization for 'americans'. 'Americans' are not interested in decentralization, 'americans' are statist at heart therefore they are interested in bringing new centers.
'Americans' cant face reality: the reality is that they have saturated the world and that now, for them, the world is shrinking. As true to 'americanism', their solution is to redefine borders in such ways new centers appear to command over a renewed periphery.
Borders are primary concerns in 'american' economics as they separate the center from its periphery, and commands the direction of concentration of wealth.
'Americans' are in urge of offloading people as they have now overpopulated the world on a global scale.
Way too many 'american' middle classers.
This is just another way to get access to other peoples money. Groups in these various wanna-be Vichy-DC fiefdoms have their own ideas on how that money should be spent. This is no different than the various entitled special recognition oppressed minority groups getting squeakier-than-thou for greater access to OPM.
ironically, my dump broke up into 6 pieces this morning
Bring back local control of government, local schools, and local businesses. Let's just do it. F the federal government.
Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Does it really matter....Fukushima and the return to more historical levels of rainfall (as opposed to the last 150 years) is probably more than Cali can handle already.
The never ending cancer of union pensions doens't help much either.
Of course many people will answer, what about slavery? The truth of the matter is that this abomination in the United States seemingly had to be resolved through a bloody conflict given the economic interests in the south at the time. The founders decided one war was enough, and let this horrible practice be tackled almost a hundred years later through violent conflict.
_____________________________________________
No kidding. So between the end of the war of independence and the civil war, the US did not engage in any war. As usual with 'americans', they do not present ideas to ponder on, but lies to accept to be part of a gang. Mythology is all that 'americans' have. They cant deal in reality, save for 'americans' in power. And when they are in power, they treat problems using 'american' ways. Which has proven to solve nothing but to worsen even things thought not to be worsened as they appeared to as worse as possible.
Slavery is not contrary to 'americanism'. 'Americanism' promotes submission tagged as freedom, as freedom sells easier.
"That new paradigm will consist of freedom through decentralization, and I can’t wait to see it."
NOT with the plutocrats, power mad douchebags, bankers and trillionaires at the controls...gonna happen.
2 senators is MORE than enough from Kalifornication
Ask the immigrants. They're the ones who will be calling the shots. The last I heard, they want their own country, take back what the evil white Americans took. Viva La Raza. Most southwestern cities have a large portion that looks like Tijuana the way it is.
Didn't Mexico want it's states back. The alternative is to flood the states with enough people and make it like Puerto Rico. Just make it so you bet the benefits but none of the restrictions.
As soon as I saw that this idea came form a vulture capitalist I knew it was BS.... Looks like this guy is following the SOROS playbook to a "T"....
This breakup should happen but not for the reasons people might expect:
01 Confusion – Breaking up the current California monster government would give people years of relief from the current oppressing bureaucracy.
02 Chance to redefine – We actually may get some new leaders from the redefine
03 New trends – Some parts in the break up may accelerate positive change.
04 Redefine Power – Power in California today is held in too few hands and taken for granted. Splitting would create a necessary power struggle that will bring new voices and new ideas.
05 Resource Pig – Big entities suck up way more resources because of their enormous size. A break up will increase resource efficiency.
Many more reasons..
Corporations have being doing breakups as a standard practice for the last 200 years stating the sum of the parts is worth far more than the current sluggish company. Many of America’s great companies have emerged from these business break ups. Why not state breakups?
We don't have self-governance because we don't insist on it. Even simple questions that could be answered remain unanswered. It wouldn't be that expensive to map out all the governments, stick it on a GIS server and be able to fire off a personal report of all the governments that claim jurisdiction over your residence (by hand I personally counted mine at 15, some urban areas are more complex than that). Nobody's done it. We don't even have a comprehensive list of governments.
Nobody iterates through that non-existent list and gets the answer to the most basic questions like "what do you do", "how do you define success for each of the things you do", and "how are you doing at each of the things you do". That can all get popped into a text file tucked away in a standard place on each government's web site in a machine readable format, and be fodder for BI dashboards covering your individual rosters of governments so that you'll actually have a shot at understanding what's going on in the 1 hour per week that ordinary people devote to this sort of thing.
When Web 3.0 comes out of the labs, at that point we'd have a baseline of both what should be happening and what governments assert will be happening to compare to the many, many sensors out there deployed as part of the Internet of Things to give us evidence of what is actually happening.
No political splitting is going to fix the information void that makes self government currently impossible. We don't even have our municipalities under control. Why would much bigger institutions like the new 6 Californias somehow make things better?
Where does Vault 13 fit into this, and does this affect where the Brotherhood of Steel establishes it's headquarters?
Article 4, section 3 of the Constitution says:
"New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress."
So they'd need congressional approval for this to happen, not just approval from the citizens of the state involved.