Should We Divide?

Governor Gavin Newsome proved how divided our country is when he used re-election funds to pay for eighteen billboards touting California’s abortion availability…in other states. He targeted seven Republican states that are less than friendly towards abortion in one of the most absurd reelection expenses…not spent in his state. This encapsulates a deep rift between the radical direction the Democrat run states are sprinting towards and the bulwark the Republican states are attempting to build in defense. From abortion to parental rights, the differences in policy could not be starker. This has led to many off-handed comments about how, perhaps, we would be better off if the deeply Democrat states were just bundled up into a separate country and the red states can escape the impending doom (and bankruptcy) the blue states are headed towards. The upcoming election continues to highlight how deeply divided we are, but would we be better off even entertaining the idea that the country should split? Are we almost at the point that it might be most wise to split before it leads to violence?

For the sake of robust discussion, let us ignore some of the practicality of the suggestion. There certainly are many hurdles to overcome: would it be two or three countries? Where is the dividing line? How do you parcel out the differences between urban centers versus rural counties? Instead, we have a much larger bridge to cross should the country devolve into smaller parts. We share a common language, common culture, and family ties traverse this expansive nation. We are intricately interconnected by roads and commerce and the economy relies on free trade across state borders. How would borders be enforced amongst us with all these commonalities? If we cannot even build a wall on our southern border, how would we even begin to try to police and enforce a new border between the different countries? Border enforcement is only the beginning of the much larger issue that would plague this theoretically divided country.

Even now, states act as each other’s antagonists. Policy passed in one state is countered by another. Political figures in one state are involved in the politics of another without even including the conduct of congressional politicians.  Would this involvement decrease if the country were to divide, or would it instead sink to even greater depths? Would not national issues be even greater than seemingly meaningless state issues?  When these same politicians can instead stand at the pulpit and speak of national threats, their involvement in the politics of the separate nations will only increase. If we think the divide is great now, it will seem merely a crack in the sidewalk when opposing armies get involved. Splitting the nation would increase the political animus and sink this continent into petty political squabbles and positioning, making the continent a meaningless actor on the world stage.

But wouldn’t the fiscally conservative nation at least be able to save the people money and be in a better position than we are now? Perhaps not. The increased cost of the aforementioned border issue and increased need for military would likely increase beyond what even the most conservative estimates would deem probable. Bickering countries would lead to an arms race which would only burden the citizens with an increased tax drain for their own security. We would save very little on the cost of government: we would still need a federal system in each of the countries (albeit hopefully one of the new countries would try to decrease the bureaucratic system). This federal system would need to support the institutions necessary to be considered on a global level, except now this cost would double or even triple due to having multiple countries. It is very easy to see the sides bickering and getting into a war of tariffs and taxes to encourage “national production.” Apart from slightly reducing the size of government, there are very few fiscal advantages to be gained.

It would instead appear that, for the sake of our future, we are incredibly bound together during this titanic clash of ideology. A culture that is incapable of thinking beyond the present should not create nation building ideas that impact generations to come. While this silly idea of separating the country may seem just that, we need to become a people and a culture that does not blindly throw out ideas that are not well-reasoned and thought out. It may be expeditious to split instead of confronting the harsh realities of the ideological fight and slow march that progressivism has had through our culture, but it is very rare for an action to be both expeditious and fruitful. We instead need to focus on becoming a virtuous and good people who can raise a generation of thoughtful and wise individuals who can fix this mess that our country has fallen into. We must fight the culture wars instead of shrinking away from them.