Have you heard about the Greater Idaho movement? It’s a movement that is encouraging 18 counties in Oregon along with a number of counties in California to join Idaho. Maybe a decade ago, most people would have assumed the whole thing was put together by a crank and would have just laughed it off. That’s no longer the case. In fact, there are now seven counties in Oregon that voted to join Idaho and you can be sure that more Oregon counties will make the same choice in the next few years.
Of course, there’s a lot more involved than just a vote. The state of Oregon (and later California if those counties agree to it) would have to approve of those counties leaving and more importantly, the state of Idaho would have to okay those counties joining their state. On top of that, Congress would likely have to approve of any such interstate compact.
However, as Dan Bongino noted, this is a good idea:
It also may be more doable than people think. Liberals in California and Oregon despise conservatives and generally have a low opinion of the sort of rural areas that would likely take advantage of this. This would be their chance to get rid of a lot of conservatives they don’t want in their states anyway while locking in a liberal super-majority long term. On the other hand, it would give Idaho an opportunity to become a much bigger, more influential state while bringing in more conservative counties that would lock in Republican control of that state long term. Furthermore, if the counties in California actually went along with this, it could give Idaho access to the Pacific Ocean. Would Congress go along with it? It’s impossible to say at this early date, but a better question might be, “If California, Oregon, and Idaho decide they want this, would Congress stop it?”
In other words, this at least seems possible and that is a very good thing.
If individuals don’t like the state they’re living in, they should move. Large numbers of people, mostly in liberal states, have done just that in the last year. However, in states where some groups of people are locked out of power and view the people in charge as hostile to their interests, why shouldn’t they be able to choose to move as a group to a willing contiguous state that better represents their interests? Should we even be okay with states saying, “We’re going to force your county to be part of our state, even though you don’t want to be here and there’s a contiguous state that wants to add you to their ranks?” There’s an awful lot of talk about freedom and choice in America, so why shouldn’t those counties have that choice if they want it? It’s the right thing to do.
It would also be likely to improve the governance of liberal states by forcing them to finally suffer at least SOME consequences for poor performance. There are a lot of poorly governed Democratic states where everyone knows that no matter how badly the politicians screw up, they’ll never be replaced by a Republican. Furthermore, even if they engage in catastrophic mistakes, like taking on an unpayable amount of debt or destroying their state’s economy by shutting it down for months on end to fight COVID, the federal government will simply step in and give them enough money to protect them from the consequences of their actions. Having whole poorly served counties say, “No thanks,” and move somewhere else would be the sort of rebuke that might even get through to liberals.
However, if you’re paying attention to the terrible economic decisions our government is making, the almost unbridgeable gap between the two parties, and the fascistic desire of liberals to rig the system so that they are both cemented into power and have very few constraints on what they can do, you recognize that it’s entirely possible that this entire country could crack up some time in the next few decades. That could mean somehow splitting up into a red and a blue America, regions splitting off, states seceding, or even a 2nd Civil War. That is not something any of us should cheer on or hope to see happen, but you are either very complacent, ignorant, or naïve if you don’t see it as a genuine possibility at this point. If that is something we could realistically face as a country down the road, then one of the wisest things we could possibly do would be to do everything possible to make sure that it’s peaceful. Despite the fact that we didn’t have nuclear weapons or tanks back then, roughly 2% of the American population died in the Civil War. If that same percentage of Americans were to die in a war today, that would mean 6 million deaths along with economic damage potentially so severe that whole regions might take decades to recover.
Do you know one of the best ways to keep things from getting that far? Respect the wishes of states and regions. If a county wants to leave a state, let it go. If a state wants to secede, let it go. If a region no longer wants to be part of the United States, respect their wishes. In a better world, it would never get that far because our culture and our political leaders would be responsive enough to the concerns of their fellow citizens to keep them from ever wanting to go their own separate ways. However, that is not the world we live in and although most of us think Abe Lincoln made the right call to go to war rather than lose the south, this is a different age, when a different decision should be made. If Texas, California, the south, or any other part of the US decided to secede, we should try to change their minds, but accept that it’s not worth forcing them to be part of our nation against their will, just as counties shouldn’t involuntarily be forced to be part of states if there’s an alternative.
Don’t miss The Dan Bongino Show