What goes up must go down right? Can any nation remain as a large organized single focused entity? Maybe North America has a head start because it is a more recently colonized and industrialized place. But look at any map. Look how often the world map itself was redrawn. Time and progress breeds dissent. Do you think NA is due for this? Can it avoid it? Do I smoke too much pot?

Originally posted by Nihilist Freak
What goes up must go down right? Can any nation remain as a large organized single focused entity? Maybe North America has a head start because it is a more recently colonized and industrialized place. But look at any map. Look how often the world map itself was redrawn. Time and progress breeds dissent. Do you think NA is due for this? Can it avoid it?

I think the opposit is happening. Look at Europe for instance. Now its usually referred as the EU.

Do I smoke too much pot?

You can never smoke too much

I see your point. The Founders even made mention of a Republic not working out well for a huge nation. It does seem that this country is made up of a handful of loosely similar nations, huh? Do I drink too much beer?

Well, look at the geography of it - you can see that Oregon, Washington and California (at least the northern part of it) are separated from the rest of the country by mountains... if they're anything like British Columbia up here, they're probably turned more towards Asia than towards, say, New York or Virginia. Plus, consider the sheer size of the United States - and the fact that the most densely populated areas are separated from each other by sometimes huge desert areas (for example, Texas is separated from California by more sparsely populated New Mexico and Arizona) means that people's mindsets may evolve in different directions.

I know that more and more, Canada is becoming regionalized, ideologically, into four entities: the West, Ontario, Québec and the Maritimes. And oftentimes it's hard to get those people to agree on anything other than asking the federal government for money.

I'm drinking wine, and I'll tell you if I've had too much in about an hour.

a large organized single focused entity?

This statement was proved to be false when USA was split in half by the elections. SOme called it a "civil" war even.
AS long as their are stupid people that want power and wealth, and only want what is good for them, no nation can last forever.



[edit on 28-11-2004 by BubbaBob]

The Romans lost their power to neighboring barbaric tribes as did those who came before the Romans. Spain lost its power by an uprising in the Netherlands and the continual defeat of its Armada in both the East and West Indies by the Brits and Dutch. Britain eventually lost its empire when America became a more inustrial than agriculture nation during the 1800's and after they lost control in China and India. America has no "rowdy" neighbors to fight with ie. barbarians, French, Spanish. The US and its allies (UK) are far more industialized and have far greater armies than those that oppose them. Even former nemisis have taken a back seat and become allies of sorts (Russia).

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I see your point. The Founders even made mention of a Republic not working out well for a huge nation. It does seem that this country is made up of a handful of loosely similar nations, huh?

Actually, the Founders intended the States to be sovereign, overseen by the Federal government, which has grown more powerful than was originally intended. It was over this matter that the Confederate States of America was founded and the War of Northern Aggression fought.


[edit on 04/11/28 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott and the War of Northern Aggression fought.

I like you more and more!

That is the reason for the war , slavery was a small part of it. I just love the terminology of that statement though......

I remember it was used in the X-files once with the typical stereotype of a southerner...sick

No, it cannot be avoided as has been experience with democracies in the past.

Nations fall, and one day, the United States of America will be no more. If there were no end there wouldn't be a beginning...

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Thorfinn Skullsplitter]

I don't see any end to the current political makeup of NA in the foreseeable future. There are no outside pressures, and none on the horizon. And even if there were, odds are they would stimulate a unified response, as opposed to a breakup.

Comparisons with previous "empires" may not be valid because we have one huge advantage never before experienced in history: instantaneous communications, which allow long distance command and control.

What about internal pressures? They exist, but in my opinion are not severe enough to overcome the unifying forces. The one arguable exception is Quebec, which could concievably separate from Canada, but even then the Québecois themselves are unlikely to countenance an isolationist type break, but will want all the advantages of economic ties both with Canada and the US. We would probably out-union event the European Union.

Internal US pressures exist as well, but I believe that as long as there is an open and democratic government, these pressures will be managed and mitigated to the point where they are not threatening.

AlexofSkye
Comparisons with previous "empires" may not be valid because we have one huge advantage never before experienced in history: instantaneous communications, which allow long distance command and control.

You beat me to the punch. This is exactly why it is easier to hold diverse sections of a large nation together. Gone are the days of couriers on horseback bringing edicts from the throne, with an average 90 day turnaround of message/response.

Just look at the recent presidential campaign. It was not unusual for the candidates to make appearances in 4 or 5 states in one day.

The forefathers, in all their wisdom, could not have envisioned today's technology.