An American Secession? It’s Not That Far-Fetched
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
Centralization was effective to get out of the Great Depression. It was again effective post WW II when economies of scale worked well. But now? We're a long way from that. We need agility and flexibility. Trying to force feed the square peg of 20th Century one size fits all into 21st Century dynamics round hole isn't working.
I'm not suggesting the fed gov be dissolved. Only that we stop overlying on it and stop feeding it (i.e., taxes).
Why not though?
On top of that the nature of the context has changed. The 20th Century was about efficiency and massive scale. On the other hand, the 21st Century requires iteration and agility. Yet we insist on using a 20th Century tool for a 21st Century job. That's not working.
But, again, perhaps that's the intention. The Union weakens. Central command gets stronger. And our basic rights and liberty disolve - slowly but surely.
Now for the facts:
1. The federal government is California’s largest industry like most states, with about 2.5 million employees
2. California is strategically important to U.S. security. The U.S. military directly owns or controls a significant portion of the southern California coastline. On top of that, the defense department uses central California for military testing and the federal government in general owns or controls much of the mountainous areas in the north and east (Note: that’s where the water comes from)
3. Texas is home to the 2 largest Army posts, many of the U.S. largest defense contractors, and the U.S. space industry. All of it is dependent on federal spending.
4. Texas is part of the U.S. breadbasket, and is a major global energy supplier.
In short, neither Texas nor California can secede from the U.S. without an immediate and overwhelming federal response. They are both way too valuable to the health and security of the country. It would be over before it started.
What is clear is that the Union is fragile and imbalances in governance are unsustainable. The 50 Democratic senators represent far more people than the Republican senators.
What's your source?