I’ve thought for years that this is not one or two countries, but as many as five. The splits are ideological, cultural, religious, economic and geographic. I first came to this realization at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing. While I was aghast at the barbarism of the bombing, I didn’t immediately feel it was an “American” bombing - I’d never been to Oklahoma City, don’t know anybody from Oklahoma City and know very little about the city or state. It may as well have been in France, for as much as it registered beyond the human impact.
And I don’t say that with any disrespect intended at all to that part of the country or its residents. I suspect that if a major catastrophe happened in Baltimore tomorrow, there are a fair amount of people in the U.S. who wouldn’t even know where Baltimore *is* and wouldn’t have the same feelings as somebody living in the mid-Atlantic would.
While I know that it’s completely unrealistic, I think the U.S. should be divided into five geographically separate countries - northeast, southeast, midwest, south and west. I think that everybody would feel much more comfortable and it would help ease some of the tensions we all feel. I don’t think these entities would for a minute have to be enemies - I’d certainly encourage free trade, free travel between the entities, etc., but have a capital in each of the five in order for people to feel better represented and closer to their government than they currently do.
The reason we are in this mess is because the federal government, abetted by the Supreme Court, has usurped far too much power. If it would just stick to operating within the enumerated powers given it in the Constitution we would be fine. New York would be able to destroy itself if it so desired, but without impact on other states.
When stupid policy comes out of Albany it only screws New York. The problem is that when stupid policy comes out of DC it screws us all.
All the states can peacefully coexist in the union - even openly socialist ones alongside capitalist ones and liberal ones alongside conservative ones - if and only if the power in DC is kept in check.
Think about much of the things that DC does, then think how much better your own state could do them all, or some, or even none if it so desired.
Federalism is the only way to maximize the happiness of the people, because it preserves self government and preserves all 50 flavors. If you don’t like where you are, you can move to any one of 49 other places and still be an American.
Big federal government is the disease, not so much other states.
Theoretically, we're supposed to be 50 (57 depending on who you ask). If you look at the usage and context of the word "State" prior to the U.S. it was synonymous with "country," while "nation" had a more ethno-linguistic connotation. As KeyesPlease noted, this was the original intent behind Federalism. The Civil War and Reconstruction allowed for some encroachment upon, and undermining of this concept by the FedGov, but nothing like the 17th Amendment. Had it not been for that Amendment, Obama would have never risen above community organizer.