What do you think would happen? also I want to talk about the states themselves and not what will happen to the world (cause we already know what would happen)

Unless a highly contiguous agreement was reached where trade and relative freedom of movement was maintained between the states as in the Schengen Zone of the European Union then we would revert to conditions under the Article of Confederation. Theoretically if all states continued to use the same currency then trade could be adequately maintained. However, there would be severe displaced persons problem due to the separation of families and businesses across state lines. Also there would be general chaos in terms of how the federal government would be decentralized: How would the states divide the national debt? How would the military be divided? Which states would get the nuclear weapons? Would US soldiers return to serve their own individual state? How would states protect against aggressive military action and war between individual states? Would states be able to take control of natural resources within their own state or would they have to be shared?


The fact is that secession is constitutionally legal within the framework of the constitution: there is no amendment prohibiting the ability of a state to remove itself from its contractual obligations to the federal government. Because no explicit mention is made over the right of secession it is a reserved power of the state government (BUT ONLY THE STATE GOVERNMENTS...counties and cities cannot secede).

There would be too much chaos and anarchy if all 50 states tried to separate. There would be a run on all the banks. There would be complete destruction in the infrastructure and transport of resources and food. The value of the Dollar would collapse. The severity of these problems is why a regional separation of American is much more plausible and I think beneficial to the overall health and stability of North America. I would not propose the 4 region separation as Russian Intelligence has outlined, but instead would theorize a 3 region breakup. 1st region would be the east coast and the great lakes region. 2nd region would be the old south, the midwest, parts of the southwest, and the northwest (excluding oregon and washington). The last region would be the west coast (California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, arizona, and new mexico). I think it would be safe believe that Hawaii and Alaska would not fit into this regional separation plans and would instead by annexed by China and Russia respectively.

Edited 11/6/2015 03:44:01

They probably wouldn't stay independent for long. Given that most states don't have all the resources they need for self-sufficiency you'd soon see coalitions spring up where small groups of states band together so they can compete with larger states.

States such as Texas, California, and New York would likely do fine on their own. All in all, things would still be alright as long as the states don't start warring each other over ideological differences and resource disputes.

I assume what we all know would happen is colonial influence?

Anyhow, I think that certain states would create their own Empire (Ex Texas, California, and New York due to Population, Economy, and the likes), the Midwest/Great lakes would likely unify, same as the south (if Texas doesn't create and empire). New England would unify or be incorporated into New York or something. Maryland/D.C. would likely claim to be the last of America. The Pacific Northwest would likely go to Cali as they are very near, the Southwest would perhaps model after Mexico due to the close proximity. The Dakotas may unite, and the rest of the Great Plains would likely lack any kind of Centralized Government due to the low population of Wyoming, the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho, etc. etc.

Economics in the Midwest/Great Plains/Great Lakes would rely heavily on Fishing, lumber, and farming, while the East Coast/New England would be likely trading with Europe and such. The West Coast/South West/Nevada would have mining, fishing, and desert sand shit...I don't know. The south would likely also revert to Farming and perhaps some would even try to bring back slavery, though I think they matured past that point.

And there you have it, American's idea of how the 50 American states would fare.

(Go Wisco)

Edited 11/6/2015 03:49:57

They'd realize they done f*cked up, and rejoin.

Also let's say California, Texas, and New York became the Main Regional Powers in the Former US. Now, let's put the World in and what would become

I did not find a bigger sized map sorry, but this one is interesting ahah

I don't think there's any justification for the boundaries of that map. Way to disjointed and unrealistic in my mind. Why wouldn't the old south form one big regional empire? They're culture, religious affiliation, and political ideologies are practically homogeneous.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/11/08/which-of-the-11-american-nations-do-you-live-in/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_2_na

This is an interesting article, which connects to this question I believe.

They're culture, religious affiliation, and political ideologies are practically homogeneous.

Spoken exactly like someone who's never been to the South.

...going to make a logical argument with actual facts with that fallacious statement?

...going to make a logical argument with actual facts with that fallacious statement?

Isn't that a "fallacious statement" itself, that you just said?

*Implying there was actually arguing going on
*Implying you had actual truths

Edited 11/8/2015 06:41:13

I mean, I actually live in the South. Outside shitty documentaries and foreign history books, no, the region is nowhere near culturally homogeneous.

Technically he did argue (or at least passive-aggressively imply) that I had never been to the South (which is false and he had no way of knowing this unless he was stalking me) and so had no right to comment on it.

Its true that my understanding of the South as being homogeneous is based off accredited books and historical documentation and literature. I have been to about 5-6 states in the south (Florida, Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama), but I have never lived there (that's true). Knyte can you give me examples of how they are heterogeneous (besides the obvious one like Louisiana is French-based while Georgia is more Anglo-Saxon). I am speaking of current historical trends.