This map is a real trip. South Carolina splitting from Georgia? Mexico owning New Mexico but not Arizona? If he's going to prop up ridiculous fantasies, at least he could try harder.
What pains the the Russians to no end is that the very idea of the nation state is disentigrating in the US, Europe, and South America. Only their backward, so-called "democracy" and a handful of nations in east Asia take it very seriously anymore, while the concept is used to pit regions against one another in Africa (see the US interference in Ethiopia and Somalia for a good case study). Make no mistake, "India vs. Pakistan" and "Iran vs. the Middle East" are culture wars with borders providing the necessary tension.
Nah, it's not yellow journalism -- it's from the WSJ's middle column, a place for quirky character profiles (which this story is) and human-interest stories. Previous topics have included truck-driving competitions and the wild-boar infestation of Berlin.
"Nah, it's not yellow journalism -- it's from the WSJ's middle column, a place for quirky character profiles (which this story is) and human-interest stories. Previous topics have included truck-driving competitions and the wild-boar infestation of Berlin."
Good point. CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. The article was published to start interesting conversations like the one in this thread.
That's exactly the thoughts that I had. The map looked like it was logically partitioned by geography with the map maker unfamiliar with the local cultures in those states. I can't see Arizona siding with California over Texas (or any of the other western states except maybe Oregon and Washington). The same goes for traditionally southern states of South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia all opting to join the EU?
I can see an economic collapse and the fall of the USA as the most dominant super-power, but I don't see the country fracturing along the lines given in this article. One does not necessarily lead to the other.
Not to be petty, but West Virginia isn't really a southern state. It, along with portions of Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Tennessee, is part of what we call Appalachia, a mostly rural rust-belt region.
MERCOSUR and the EU predictably come to mind. The US, I think, treats Canada and Mexico very differently from other nations (being a neighbor); North America is fairly unified. The US doesn't hold up its non-interventionist/isolationist end of the Monroe Doctrine, but the loose North/South American protectorate set out by that diplomatic philosophy certainly holds true today. MERCOSUR is a good example of nations asserting their sovereignty with a trade bloc rather than via national posturing, weakening this protectorate.
I can't provide links (books are of greater help when synthesizing theories for me) to prove this, but I do recommend reading up on the aforementioned trading blocs, as well as this excellent book: http://www.amazon.com/End-Nation-State-Regional-Economies/dp...
This map is a real trip. South Carolina splitting from Georgia? Mexico owning New Mexico but not Arizona? If he's going to prop up ridiculous fantasies, at least he could try harder.
What pains the the Russians to no end is that the very idea of the nation state is disentigrating in the US, Europe, and South America. Only their backward, so-called "democracy" and a handful of nations in east Asia take it very seriously anymore, while the concept is used to pit regions against one another in Africa (see the US interference in Ethiopia and Somalia for a good case study). Make no mistake, "India vs. Pakistan" and "Iran vs. the Middle East" are culture wars with borders providing the necessary tension.