• Random Dent@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      And as if they would even be content with their own land and wouldn’t continuously try to spread their nonsense in every possible direction regardless of whether people want to hear it or not.

      Source: am in Canada

    • Allonzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      In Republican’s fever dream scenario, they’d consider splitting the nation up to be marooning 200 million people at gunpoint stranded to die standing room only on a military embargoed Puerto Rico. They’d call that perfectly fair and not mass murder.

      Get your logic out of here as to why that isn’t possible.

  • some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Anyone else find it really jarring that MTG has some good takes here and there lately? First Gaza, now this? I mean, she’s still clearly the same awful hag as always, but the cynic in me wonders if she’s trying to rehab her image or something after all the heinous shenanigans.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    4 days ago

    Government is not answer, God is.

    Turn your full faith and trust to our Almighty God and our Savior Jesus.

    Tighten your circle around your family and protect them at all times.

    They really just can’t comprehend that they’re violent far right religious extremists…

    Can they?

    Like, if you translated what Christian Republicans and the Taliban wanted into a neutral 3rd language, I really don’t think people would be able to tell which is which.

    These dumbfucks don’t even realize “God” and “Allah” are literally the same fucking dirty and they agree on 99.9999%.

    It’s like when one far right extremists shoots another far right extremist in the neck because there’s 2-3 details they disagree on.

    If anyone isn’t exactly the same, they’re “them” and an enemy.

    If we did actually split the country, their side would just keep picking new groups to run out of their territory until there’s no one left on their side.

  • Assassassin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    4 days ago

    “it’s not safe for anyone”… Because you’re actively making it that way, Margarine Thermometer Greed. Jfc conservatives are so fucking stupid and disingenuous. Repeated school shootings aren’t a major issue, but as soon as the bullets start landing on them, the pearls get clutched. It’s so transparent and pathetic.

  • Catpain Typo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    4 days ago

    Split up the USA… who would benefit from that most? Ah yes Russia and China. As if any more proof that the US government are assets.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    As much as many of us would welcome it, the reality is that the new MAGA country would declare war on us immediately.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    4 days ago

    Anyone under the delusion that splitting a country can be peaceful should research any split since the idea of nationalism took hold. India and Pakistan are still the odds on favorite to kill us all with a nuclear winter.

    • survirtual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      This reminds me of the spike in cellular biophoton emissions during mitosis.

      Biophoton emissions, basically a faint glow of light emitted by living cells due to metabolic processes, increase sharply at the moment a cell replicates into two cells. It appears as a flash if observing these emissions.

      There is a lot to learn about our ideal society by observing our biological processes. The human body is a good example of a functioning mass-scale social substrate. The representative sample that guides the body is billions of neurons. Considering a human body has around 37 trillion cells, and roughly 170 billion brain cells (86 billion neurons + 85 billion non-neural brain cells), that gives us around a 200:1 representative sample. For every 200 cells, there is 1 representative.

      Fascinating, isn’t it? Dunbar’s number states humans can only keep track of a limited number of relationships. That number is a cognitive limit of around 150 stable relationships that we can keep track of. The limit’s range has been stretched to 100 - 250 stable relationships.

      In other words…the ratio of brain cells to other cells is nearly the same as Dunbar’s number. It is reasonable to conclude, then, for a functioning society (because human bodies are far more functional than our planetary society), we need to have a ratio limit on representation. That limit is 200:1. For every 200 people, we need 1 representative.

      For the US, for example, with 347 million people, a stable government would need 1.7 million representatives. Sounds crazy, doesn’t it, compared to the ass backwards mechanism at play now? But think about it for a bit, and you will find why it is so stable.

      That is too many people for an elite to control. It is too many to be corrupted. It adds redundancy. It adds direct accountability, each rep would have a personal relationship with their people, because it is within the Dunbar limit of what they can keep track of.

      Something to think about.

      • saimen@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Very interesting. The problem then is how 1.7 million people can do politics. How can they debate? How can the decide anything. I guess multiple levels? The 1.7 million are represented by 8500 and they are by 42.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Any level with a low number can be controlled by elites. Debate can be done on forums. Good ideas go up, bad ideas go down in flames.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        To add to the other response the leaders of both nationalities were veterans of the Prague Spring. They had no appetite for more violence. Could you truly say the same of the US?

        Congratulations on finding a split I missed though.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m not aware of any major strife between Czechia and Slovakia

        Czechoslovakia was a combination of two historically distinct ethnic groups, so there was relatively little “sorting” during the partisan in the wake of the USSR’s collapse.

        Compared to the break up of Yugoslavia or the “Two State Solution” in Israel, it was utopian. But that’s a hold over of the pre-WWs ethnic make up of these regions. You don’t have anything like this in the much more internally diverse and mixed populations of the US.

        Furthermore, over the last five years, the high rate of undocumented immigration and smuggling has lead to Czechnia tightening its border. We may see a rise in ethnic nationalism create friction in the future.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      States would have to be split as well, and random chunks of states. And soon as anyone says, “how do we split up the national debt” people would say huh, impossible to split.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    4 days ago

    You know, if you guys stop being so goddamned violent, everyone would be very safe.

    JFC, this isn’t rocket science.

  • chilicheeselies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 days ago

    I kind of agree honestly. We dont have the kind of leadership that brings people together. We could have, but we dont. Until we have more Bernie Sanders types (aka, responsible adults who consider everyone a stakeholder) there is no hope for unity.

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      No way the red state faction stays peaceful, as soon as they fuck something up they’ll deflect blame on to the blue state faction and start doing airstrikes on us to distract

      e; Also, this red state faction could never ever ever be allowed to have a nuclear arsenal or we would all be very fucked, so that’s another big hurdle to any kind of breakup plan

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 days ago

          Exactly. The biggest reason the United States is a wealthy place with the ability to pay for a good social safety net* isn’t because we have the best system of government or regulations or people or any of that nonsense politicians and pundits will say, it’s because we never had WWI and II play out across our territory and we haven’t had to waste a bunch of money protecting ourselves from Canada or Mexico.

          Fuck a lot of what my country has done throughout history, but it’s got a great foundation for building something that doesn’t suck.

          *Of course it’s definitely not doing this currently, but there’s potential here

        • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Yes, but blue states also physically house or contain a massive amount of military hardware and bases.

          For example, broadly speaking, there are not too many major naval bases in red states, there are not too many major army bases in blue states.

          Where are which air wings, at the moment?

          Which units and commanders pick which sides?

          Who gets which nukes?

          … Who knows?

          We would be far from the first country going through a civil war or balkanization or coup or revolution or even the first time in our own history where things like this would come into play.

          Also, it probably would be less about money, per se, as to where would be potentially invaded… as it would be… water, areas with any kind of major manufacturing hubs, extractable natural resources, arable land, large power plants, etc.

          It is also highly unlikely that there would be a clean break along state boundaries… lines would almost certainly be redrawn, in one way or another.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 days ago

        They wouldn’t be able to uphold the industrial capacity without blue states. At least Russia has oil and Siberian resources. The fuck would they have? Texas is barely holding together and oil extraction may not be maintained on a large enough scale and Alaska is weird and would probably join the blue states.

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 days ago

          The fuck would they have?

          Lots of guns and zero humility or acceptance of their own mistakes. Also, Florida sinking into the ocean probably isn’t going to make anyone in that territory more well behaved.

          Also also - it wouldn’t be fair to the rest of the world to let this red state country come into existence, because when they aren’t attacking us they’d probably be flinging shit at places like Mexico and Cuba. Also, you know their environmental policies would be a fucking disaster that the global climate really can’t afford.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 days ago

            Worst case scenario you chuck a couple sabateurs over the boarder and have them blow up the water infrastructure. Try being uppity without water.