US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[General Emílio Médici]

In my shit hole country this was reported as the g20 rallying behind Ukraine and condemning Russia.

In mine they went with a middle ground, saying there was a "strong condemnation of the use of force" but "the invasion of Ukraine was side stepped as a issue"

I just assume the TV is lying about everything they say and end up with a better odds than coinflips.

 

[Candlelight Desolation]

it might be safest to dissolve the union and have the states run themselves.

Didn't work out for the Holy Roman Empire or Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. That was part of the plan for the Confederate States - the states having more of an individual say in how the government was run, as per their constitution. Thing is, countries which don't go for centralization don't end well, as I've just listed some examples. Most centralized nations fall to the might of other centralized nations. If all 50 states become independent, that'll open the floodgates for Canada to eat up New England, Mexico to take back Arizona, Texas, etc, and possibly for China or Russia to start grabbing Hawaii and Alaska.

Balkanization can and does happen - see Yugoslavia or the Roman Empire. But the thing is, while there is talk in the US in recent years of a "national divorce", it is highly unlikely to happen. All of these people online claiming to be "patriotic American nationalists" talking about how Texas should secede and take Oklahoma, Alabama, and Florida with them. No real "American nationalist" would support secession, just take a look at how Andrew Jackson handled the Nullification Crisis. And that's not supporting the idiots running the show right now, it's just pointing out that something like what you suggested is not going to end well; we're better off united.

 

[Betonhaus]

we're better off united.

A renegotiation of several of the governmental functions is necessary though. Politicians dedicate their entire careers to winning votes so that actually running the country is an afterthought. In some ways having a king would be better as you have a family who's traditions and education are dedicated to the running of a country at this scale. it would take several generations of hard learned lessons to get to that point, however.

...what is the longest running democracy in history that did not have a king or inherited positions?

 

[The Man With No Name]

The best part of that chart is Psychology and Sociology are scrub tier, but Social Psychology is literally for doublesmarts.

Likewise Creative Writing is for tards, Comparative Lit is for midwits, but Classics is high tier. You don't find many Shanequas and Emily They/Thems out doing Shakespeare, Homer, and the Arthurian Legend (unless it's "Reading X through a Feminist Lens")

 

[General Emílio Médici]

I am pretty sure the only people who honestly posit secession are either LARPers or trolling. From my experience when actual american patriots talk about secession the spin isn't "we need to dissolve the union" but instead "the union is illegitimate due to the Federal Government having broken the trust of the states and laws of the land" with a pressuposed idea to instead re-unify once the illegitimate Fed is dealt with.

I mentioned this a while ago, but a dude in Russia actually did a study where he predicted in 1998 that the USA had a 50% chance of imploding by 2010. I think he might have been onto something but couldn't have foreseen the Black Swan that was 9/11 and underestimated the US Gov love of money to keep it all going.

 

[Sithis]

I don't want secession or national divorce. I dream of something that, while even more unrealistic, is much grander in scale and lasting in effect.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

There won't be a "national divorce" simply because the dividing line is drawn at urban vs rural and not state vs state.

Even the bluest states like Commiefornia or Jew York are only blue in the big cities and even the red states like Texas and Wyoming are still massively blue in the cities.

It's not going to be as easy as some states going their own way, the divide is too widespread and too deep to solve so simply.

 

[quaawaa]

There won't be a "national divorce" simply because the dividing line is drawn at urban vs rural and not state vs state.

Even the bluest states like Commiefornia or Jew York are only blue in the big cities and even the red states like Texas and Wyoming are still massively blue in the cities.

It's not going to be as easy as some states going their own way, the divide is too widespread and too deep to solve so simply.

Within most of those cities, the dividing line is between welfare leeches/bureaucrats and workers. The blue economy exists only on paper.

 

[spinal gas chamber]

I don't want secession or national divorce. I dream of something that, while even more unrealistic, is much grander in scale and lasting in effect.

Wakanda, right? Good news is there’s a thread about some jogger planning on building that and leaving the US as a desolate wasteland after we lose all capability when there’s an exodus of the melinated.

 

[Basic Blond Boy]

It really is bewildering why they refuse to just retire. Surely living your twilight years in peace would be better than clinging on to a job.

There is always the concern that it won't be peaceful. Most of these members have agreed to so many shady dealings that leaving could mean persecution by the new hands. By staying, they ensure the last years aren't in a prison or likely taken by execution in some cases. This along with the aforementioned need for power drives the reasoning.

 

[AnotherPleb]

There is always the concern that it won't be peaceful. Most of these members have agreed to so many shady dealings that leaving could mean persecution by the new hands. By staying, they ensure the last years aren't in a prison or likely taken by execution in some cases. This along with the aforementioned need for power drives the reasoning.

If they'd started the exchange of power 15 years ago they would have been in a far better position regarding fraud.

 

[Snekposter]

...what is the longest running democracy in history that did not have a king or inherited positions?

You're looking at it. Hell, the USA has outlasted several monarchies! The USA is number two on the list of the longest-running continuous governments in the world, with only the UK beating us out. The Constitution was ratified in 1789, or 234 years ago, and I'd say we've got pretty good odds of hitting 250. How many families have had uncontested rule over their countries for 250 without being replaced?

I'll help you out: the House of Bourbon ruled France from 1589 to 1792, or only 203 years.

 

[Betonhaus]

You're looking at it. Hell, the USA has outlasted several monarchies! The USA is number two on the list of the longest-running continuous governments in the world, with only the UK beating us out. The Constitution was ratified in 1789, or 234 years ago, and I'd say we've got pretty good odds of hitting 250. How many families have had uncontested rule over their countries for 250 without being replaced?

I'll help you out: the House of Bourbon ruled France from 1589 to 1792, or only 203 years.

well that's concerning. At this moment of time November 2024 will not be pleasant. We're stuck between the Democrats very clearly losing and the Democrats being unable to lose.

 

[babadook]

Do we add the longevity of Israel to the count or...?

 

[Mr. Cow]

You're looking at it. Hell, the USA has outlasted several monarchies! The USA is number two on the list of the longest-running continuous governments in the world, with only the UK beating us out. The Constitution was ratified in 1789, or 234 years ago, and I'd say we've got pretty good odds of hitting 250. How many families have had uncontested rule over their countries for 250 without being replaced?

I'll help you out: the House of Bourbon ruled France from 1589 to 1792, or only 203 years.

House Bourbon was a cadet house of House Capet. The same family ruled France for a thousand years.

 

[Ancient Pioneer]

...what is the longest running democracy in history that did not have a king or inherited positions?

The Roman Republic 509BC-44BC, uh perhaps San Marino, which has a foundation myth during the reign of Emperor Diocletian or the Venetian Republic. Each has their warts and periods of time where you have to question if the thing really is a "democracy" by the standards of the enlightenment. By modern standards the United States is doing quite well for itself but the corruption is really starting to undermine the foundations of the country and the mass migration is eroding the bonds between citizens.

 

[Betonhaus]

The Roman Republic 509BC-44BC, uh perhaps San Marino, which has a foundation myth during the reign of Emperor Diocletian or the Venetian Republic. Each has their warts and periods of time where you have to question if the thing really is a "democracy" by the standards of the enlightenment. By modern standards the United States is doing quite well for itself but the corruption is really starting to undermine the foundations of the country and the mass migration is eroding the bonds between citizens.

Seems there was a military upheaval for a while then a split halfway through

 

[ShitLurker]

we're better off united.

Are you though?

The D third of the country wants another third (and a good chunk of the last third) dead. The MAGA third is starting to finally realize this and that maybe the D third cannot be coexisted with. And then you have the final third that have no fucking idea what is even happening or what to do.

I know this won't happen, but even if every state became it's own thing and a few made their own greater region and others went to Fagnada, having a more cohesive national culture and "spirit" would be a lot more beneficial in the long run than trying to keep two room mates that fucking hate each other playing nice.

I also understand it's not as easy as state level since a lot of the retardation is concentrated on the city hellholes. Though that's the other larp solution, siege the cities and remove the problem elements. And at this point I'm just spouting rubbish, my point is, the fracturing of the US may be for the best on the long run assuming a more likeminded and cohesive group work towards it.

 

[Omen_Sulk]

I am pretty sure the only people who honestly posit secession are either LARPers or trolling. From my experience when actual american patriots talk about secession the spin isn't "we need to dissolve the union" but instead "the union is illegitimate due to the Federal Government having broken the trust of the states and laws of the land" with a pressuposed idea to instead re-unify once the illegitimate Fed is dealt with.

I mentioned this a while ago, but a dude in Russia actually did a study where he predicted in 1998 that the USA had a 50% chance of imploding by 2010. I think he might have been onto something but couldn't have foreseen the Black Swan that was 9/11 and underestimated the US Gov love of money to keep it all going.

I'm hearing on Twitter from some niche Finance pundits the US economy will have a controlled demolition in October. The Credit Suisse and Regional Banks going down was just the run up.

Also here's the Governor of Hawaii, on Maui.

 

[6MillionCoofs]

Are you though?

The D third of the country wants another third (and a good chunk of the last third) dead. The MAGA third is starting to finally realize this and that maybe the D third cannot be coexisted with. And then you have the final third that have no fucking idea what is even happening or what to do.

Made better by the fact that when the Oblivious Third realises they always side against the D Third. So in essence you hace 2/3 that hate 1/3. That can’t be maintained forever, especially when the D Third is taking progressively more dangerous action.

Something is going to give.