You redstaters might be surprised to learn that the idea looks pretty appealing from up here, too.
I’ve read the venting and the name-calling, and it’s understandable. But I know some southerners...they are remarkably bright & friendly people, and I am still struck by how naturally polite they are.
At the end of the day, we DON’T hate each other. We do, however, feel constrained by one another.
I’m a northern liberal. I want universal health care, govt run schools from K through college, high speed rail, more basic research, public broadcasting, and handgun control (at least in the cities...guns aren’t a problem in the country). But I can’t have this stuff because of the %@#^*-ing SOUTH!
From what I understand, what you want is strong churches, small govt, low taxes, light regulation. And when the blue states demand a larger natl govt for ourselves, of course it gets imposed on the red states, too.
Hard to believe, but we’re both right.
If we have an amicable split, we will each get busy developing our social systems to fit our philosophies. We will trade enormously with each other. Our Olympic teams will train together and compete with each other. The Cowboys will play in Green Bay, and bitch about the cold. The Buckeyes will play in the Sugar Bowl, and get beat again.
We will each be convinced that the other’s governing priorities will lead them to eventual collapse. And we will both be wrong. All the while, our experiment will be a model for realignment around the world.
Just thinking a little more about it, I figure after the South breaks off, the North will join with Canada and become the next superpower.
You know, if it weren’t for Fort Sumter, this whole thing could have started 150 years ago. Farm machinery would have ended slavery by 1900 anyway, and those 600,000 good men we lost in the civil war could have built a continent even better than we have now.
Hey, Dixie: Let’s talk.