United States 8 Oregon counties vote to secede and join Idaho

Sure, that's the reason they don't want it. But that's also why it's obviously a good idea.

The reality now is that you have two states where the inland population is forever held politically hostage by the coastal population. It's not representative in the slightest, and wasn't that supposed to be the idea underpinning the USA's political system? If you split this region East-West instead of North-South, however, you get two states that are both governed as the vast majority of their respective inhabitants would like it-- and that both send representatives to DC that are actually... representative of their states' overwhelming political attitudes.

Obviously, that's not what the Democrats want at all. But again: to me, that's just an extra reason to believe it's a good idea.
Not just two states. Every blue coastal state except the little entirely urbanized postage stamps in the Greater New York metropolitan area.
 
Not just two states. Every blue coastal state except the little entirely urbanized postage stamps in the Greater New York metropolitan area.
At some point, I've outlined an idea to have two Congresses and two Presidents. One "rural" and one "urban". In other words: the big metropoleis elect their own to govern them, and the back-country does the same. They are in a league with each other, but don't control each other's domestic affairs at all. On foreign affairs, they vote together, and any proposal (e.g. a declaration of war, or entry into a treaty) requires the assent of both.

That is obviously a far-fetched notion, but that's probably the closest one might get to vaguely representative government. And I would support it for any country, not just the USA specifically.
 
At some point, I've outlined an idea to have two Congresses and two Presidents. One "rural" and one "urban". In other words: the big metropoleis elect their own to govern them, and the back-country does the same. They are in a league with each other, but don't control each other's domestic affairs at all. On foreign affairs, they vote together, and any proposal (e.g. a declaration of war, or entry into a treaty) requires the assent of both.

That is obviously a far-fetched notion, but that's probably the closest one might get to vaguely representative government. And I would support it for any country, not just the USA specifically.
That's....probably the quickest route to Civil War I've heard yet.
 
Obviously, that's not what the Democrats want at all. But again: to me, that's just an extra reason to believe it's a good idea.
Heck, lf we had a innovative political leadership, I could already see a easy compromise: make Red Cascadia, Admit DC as a state and add Puerto Rico. Three new states, one red, one blue, and one swing. Everyone is happy. Sadly we don’t have innovative leadership.
 
That's....probably the quickest route to Civil War I've heard yet.
Rather, the avoidance of one. Forced unity is what creates pressure. Give things a bit more space, and the pressure is reduced.

Right now, a state like Illinois is politically dominated by Chicago. But now imagine that the Chigaco metropolis is a state unto itself, separate from Illinois. Imagine New York City as a state and the rest of New York as another state. Imagine Los Angeles as a state.

This would already be a great improvement. But then ask yourself: what does Los Angeles have in common with North Dakota? They might as well be on different planets. The only concrete political interest they share is the one of economic advantage (free trade within the Union) and geo-political security (the Union stands together when facing the outside world). That's it, really.

I mean... the European Union is already unbearable to all sensible persons, and that's less intrusive than the current central government of the USA. And let me tell you: fucking Amsterdam and rural Poland have about as much in common as LA and North Dakota do. Not much.
 
Rather, the avoidance of one. Forced unity is what creates pressure. Give things a bit more space, and the pressure is reduced.

Right now, a state like Illinois is politically dominated by Chicago. But now imagine that the Chigaco metropolis is a state unto itself, separate from Illinois. Imagine New York City as a state and the rest of New York as another state. Imagine Los Angeles as a state.

This would already be a great improvement. But then ask yourself: what does Los Angeles have in common with North Dakota? They might as well be on different planets. The only concrete political interest they share is the one of economic advantage (free trade within the Union) and geo-political security (the Union stands together when facing the outside world). That's it, really.

I mean... the European Union is already unbearable to all sensible persons, and that's less intrusive than the current central government of the USA. And let me tell you: fucking Amsterdam and rural Poland have about as much in common as LA and North Dakota do. Not much.

we have a common language.
 
I mean... the European Union is already unbearable to all sensible persons, and that's less intrusive than the current central government of the USA. And let me tell you: fucking Amsterdam and rural Poland have about as much in common as LA and North Dakota do. Not much.

Speaking as a well-travelled American, LA and North Dakota have a lot more in common than Amsterdam and Rural Poland.

A lot less than fellow citizens in a nation should, but a lot more than that.

And if you go back 50-60 years, before leftists had overtaken the educational system, they'd have a heck of a lot more in common too.
 
Speaking as a well-travelled American, LA and North Dakota have a lot more in common than Amsterdam and Rural Poland.

A lot less than fellow citizens in a nation should, but a lot more than that.
When I see the bitter divides, the utterly opposed views, between dramatically different parts of the United States -- as an outsider gazing upon it -- it seems like all the commonalities are increasingly superficial, and the stark differences ever more central to the identity of the opposing sides. (And this is seen all over the world, and within all countries, but the USA is so big that it plays out on a large, continental scale within the borders of the continent-country.)

To put that in the context of the thread: regardless of how it's resolved, I understand why those regions of Eastern Oregon want to be away from the coastal regions, and I think the reasons that compel them in this will only grow stronger over time. Not just there, but everywhere.


And if you go back 50-60 years, before leftists had overtaken the educational system, they'd have a heck of a lot more in common too.
Sure, but back then, there was way more rural Netherlands left, too-- and it was way more conservative, and the attitudes of its inhabitants had way more in common with the attitudes of those in rural Poland. The same trend in seen everywhere.

The big cities have grown like tumours, and the power of central governments everywhere has grown in the same period. Since the central goverment is invariably seated in the big city, we are now all under the yoke of the city-men. But they are ever more alienated from what they deem "the unimportant back-country"-- which therefore chafes more and more under the current system.

This is where the increasing calls for various splits and re-arrangements come from. (See also the thread on the Dutch farmer protests, for instance. Or the whole matter of US states having very different ideas about abortion. None of these are isolated subjects; they are facets of the same struggle.)


we have a common language.
Certainly. And use it to express fundamentally different ideas, which are mutually alien and hostile to each other.

I truly believe that people who have different languages but the same values have far more in common with each other than do people with the same language but different values.
 
Last edited:
I truly believe that people who have different languages but the same values have far more in common with each other than do people with the same language but different values.
It's true, I'm reminded of a certain Rokosz*, probably Zebrzydowski's where there was a division between Poles and Lithuanians, the latter, due to Polish cultural superiority, were largely assimilated to the point that no one knew Lithuanian.
So what was going on? Lithuanians(nobles) insulted Poles(nobles) in Polish, while marking their separateness, Even though both sides spoke the same language! A common language made little difference.


*Rokosz is an interesting thing, because it is the right to revolt against authority. When I was younger and influenced by the prevailing historical propaganda, Rokosze was portrayed as something bad and a weakness of the PLC, now I see that it was a good mechanism to defend the Polish system against tyrants. Of course, it was a double-edged sword, sometimes Rokoszs ended badly, but many of them were quite right.
 
Heck, lf we had a innovative political leadership, I could already see a easy compromise: make Red Cascadia, Admit DC as a state and add Puerto Rico. Three new states, one red, one blue, and one swing. Everyone is happy. Sadly we don’t have innovative leadership.
Puerto Rico should become the 51st State: make it a Blue State.

DC should be annexed by Virginia
 
Another rural Oregon county voted to explore moving to Idaho, part of a larger effort to secede from the blue state

"
Harney County became the latest Oregon county to express interest in joining the "Greater Idaho" movement, an effort to secede from Democratic-leaning Oregon and join conservative Idaho.

On Tuesday, a measure that would require local officials to hold meetings about the idea passed, with 63% of the vote in favor, according to the early results.

Seven other Oregon counties have previously voted in favor of exploring the move: Lake, Grant, Baker, Malheur, Union, Sherman, and Jefferson."

Two more Oregon counties to vote on whether or not to secede into Idaho
"Secession will be on the ballot in two Oregon counties in the Nov. 8 elections when voters will either accept or reject joining the Greater Idaho initiative.

The movement aims to facilitate the transfer of 15 full counties and two partial counties in eastern Oregon, two-thirds of Oregon’s total land mass, into neighboring Idaho. It’s an area that is overwhelmingly conservative, while the state’s politics are dominated by the liberal cities of Portland, Eugene and Bend in western Oregon.

The two voting counties in the upcoming election are Morrow and Wheeler."

basically everything east of the Rockies is rural, conservative, and done with the coast. many feel that the government in Salem does not represent their interests and as such they want to join Idaho.

I fully support their secession effort. One great way to achieve greater self-determination is to do it internally. It's much better than a complete and total breakup of the US, that's for sure!
 
Update: We're up to 11 counties now and gaining. A general map plan has been produced.


As commentators have noted, this is highly unlikely to actually do anything. Moving land from Oregon to Idaho requires the agreement of Idaho's legislature, Oregon's, and Congress. Given that this would move seats from one party to another, it's highly unlikely to succeed unless said party (you know who you are) has a pretty solid lock on congress, and even then Oregon probably won't consent to lose 400,000 voters who count for the purpose of giving them seats but can be ignored because they're outnumbered by Portland.

This is beyond the fact that the government probably isn't keen on people getting the idea that they can secede, even within the same country, from governments they don't like and that don't care for them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top