...Share This Article on: Digg! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Google! Live! Facebook! Slashdot! Technorati! StumbleUpon! Add this page to Mister Wong Newsvine!Furl!Print This Page  |  

Send to a Friend

Send to a friend
Forum, Russia

Aspirations of the Seven States
Seeking to Secede from the US

By Maxim Kalashnikov

The U.S. is drawing closer to Civil War II. And if the U.S. — the largest economy and market in the world — collapses in the same way as in 1929, this will cause a new round of terrible social and economic crises worldwide.

Translated By Ilgiz Kambarov

16 November 2012

Edited by Heather Martin

Russia - Forum - Original Article (Russian)

Crisis of the U.S. — Crisis of Russia

My old forecast that America would have to choose between two scenarios — disintegration and new totalitarianism — is coming completely true. Continuation will be the most difficult. Will Russia be able to endure?

Maxim Kalashnikov has written and spoken about the fluctuation of the U.S. between disintegration and new totalitarianism since 2008. Everyone who follows my work knows it very well. And now my predictions are being realized: Seven states of the former Confederacy (1861-1865) collected petitions to secede from the U.S.

Thus, the disintegration of America went from a hypothetical possibility into a visible possibility. Time paradoxically returns back to 1861. The deepest crisis — not economic, but systemic — expands rapidly from the one at the capitalist system’s core into a political one. The U.S. is drawing closer to Civil War II. And if the U.S. — the largest economy and market in the world — collapses in the same way as in 1929, this will cause a new round of terrible social and economic crises worldwide.

Most likely, in Pindostan there will be neither a new Roosevelt nor Lincoln II nor even an American Hitler.* Therefore, everything will sweep toward the collapse scenario. It is necessary to be prepared for it.

“Residents of seven U.S. states collected the necessary number of signatures for secession from the U.S. and now have the right to expect an official answer to the petitions from the federal government. Petitions are placed on the White House’s website in the section named ‘We the People,’ where anyone who wishes can write a petition or join an existing one.

So far inhabitants of 40 states have submitted petitions for secession, but only in seven of them was it possible to collect more than 25,000 signatures. The most — about 100,000 — were gathered by Texas. The petition notes that the economic problems of the U.S. grow out of the federal government’s inability to reform its budgetary policy. ‘Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union,’ the petition says.

Besides Texas, the threshold of 25,000 signatures was ‘crossed’ by Louisiana, Florida, Northern Carolina, Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee. In all these states except for Florida, the majority of inhabitants voted during the election for Obama's rival Republican Mitt Romney, who was in the end defeated …”

“… The last time 11 states left the union was in 1860 and 1861 after the election of Abraham Lincoln as president, and they created an independent Confederacy. After this, the Civil War followed, resulting in the restoration of the union (1865) …”

Again the South Is Against the North, or Rather, the South Is Against the North and the West

As we predicted, confrontation went along the way of a split of the United States of America-Confederate States of America — North-South — of 1861-1865 (“The North and the South: Presentiment of Civil War,” Nov. 21, 2011, http://m-kalashnikov.livejournal.com/1064573.html). More precisely, taking into account that the U.S. has since then extended to the west, now the conflict is more difficult: a part of the South against the North and the Far West. If you look at the map, you will see that the states that have declared a desire to begin seceding in 2012 stretch from Texas to Northern Carolina in an almost a continuous strip. (Compare it to the map of the Confederate States of America in 1861). At present, the states that didn't manage to initiate the process of collecting votes for secession are South Carolina and Mississippi and thus they are not part of the continuous strip of “new Southerners.” So far Arkansas stands aside. But considering that these states voted strongly against Obama, if a new secession begins, they most likely will join the dissenters. If you look at the map of "Romney-Obama" votes, it is visible: In comparison with 1861, the South lost only Virginia; to the north of Texas, the wedge of anti-Obama agrarian states of the Midwest grew: Oklahoma, Arizona, Utah, Kansas, Idaho, Wyoming, Nebraska, Montana, South Dakota and North Dakota. Obama’s Colorado and New Mexico are wedged between them — obviously Obama’s, owing to their populations’ large proportion of newly arrived Mexicans, migrants — but in the case that the disintegration of the country begins, they can be suppressed and included in the neo-Confederacy. (Confederacy: Confederate States of America, the notorious South in the Civil War of the 19th century).

The former North of 1861-1865 already had some losses: Though it got, nowadays, pro-Obama Virginia, it — judging by the vote against Obama — lost West Virginia, Indiana and Kentucky.

At last, the Obama-tolerant Far West — California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington — was created.

Thus, the scenario of the U.S.’s collapse, as described by writer Dan Simmons in “Flashback” in 2011 (http://m-kalashnikov.livejournal.com/1186672.html), has every chance for its realization.

Sergey Pereslegin did not for nothing say that these elections would split America practically in half, making possible an “orange revolution” scenario with mass marches to the squares by supporters of the candidate who lost. Even earlier he noticed: Just as with the transition to an industrial phase of development, Americans had to pass through the Civil War of the 19th century. Likewise, for a U.S. exit from the industrial era, it is necessary to see one more civil massacre. It is obvious to me: The American deindustrialized capitalism based on marasmic financial policies came to its logical impasse. The destruction of its own industry, foolish "post-industrialism," Reaganism and consumerism led to the degradation of white Americans and U.S. descent into a fatal debt deadlock. The U.S.’s end began in 1981 with the liberal and capitalist reforms of the Reagan era. I wrote much about it, there is no need to repeat it. Only national socialism, which was reshaped by Roosevelt's New Deal, could rescue Americans. But the Yankees in the 1980s chose the opposite way, in thirty years bringing the country to the pre-collapse stage.

In these elections 69 percent of the white population of the U.S. voted against Obama. However the votes of blacks (93 percent for Obama) and Latinos (about 80 percent) created an advantage in favor of the black president. Considering that the share of white voters in the U.S. declines all the time and that the number of children born to nonwhite inhabitants of America amounted to 50.4 percent in 2011, the problem has no solution. These children will grow up soon. Whites, having stopped engaging in manufacturing and giving birth to children, naturally became an endangered herd of good time-seeking morons. And they are losing their great country.

By and Large, There Is Nobody to Rescue the Unity of the U.S.

If the process of disintegration starts and states begin to separate, then, as a matter of fact, there is nobody to rescue the country. I cannot image divisions of blacks and Mexicans led by Obama against a white New Confederacy. I cannot image the regiments of the new North made up of homosexuals, lesbians, hipsters, university student bodies and staff, lawyers and some financiers. But if governors of breakaway states would raise their National Guards, they will have very real armed forces. The U.S. military will instantly break up. The U.S. is not prepared for civil war and the resurgence of separatism.

But it is clear what they will bring.

First, the dollar and all the trillions which have been saved up by China, Japan, Europe, Russia, etc. will fail and be destroyed. It will cause the wildest paroxysm of global crisis.

If a split happens, the capacious U.S. market will fly into turbulence. This, in turn, will cause wild downturn in economies tied to U.S. markets: the EU, China, a number of Pacific region countries. And this in turn will drop the prices for raw materials, having caused damage to the economies of the oil countries and Australia. Here, what will start is impossible to predict.

And definitely the collapse of the U.S. will finish it as a great military and nuclear power. A portion of the nuclear arsenal will remain in the new North, part in Midwestern states and some in the Far West. Can the single nuclear and industrial complex of America remain? Most likely not. Also, unequivocally the U.S. naval and aerospace power will be lost. The breakaway states will become underdeveloped, raw material-[producing] territories.

Roosevelt Was Not Found

America could have changed its fate in 2008 to 2012, if a new Roosevelt had stood as head of state.

What would have been a positive program for the U.S. in these years? First, it was necessary to increase taxes on the rich, having severely pressed the poor. It was necessary to leave the World Trade Organization and end the neoliberal economy, then begin a new industrialization of the U.S., engage in protectionism, and force the urban American populace to master all necessary production professions. Second, by raising taxes on the rich and repressing the fruitless financial sector, begin a policy of mass construction of new plants, roads, power plants, etc., at the same time throwing considerable funds toward stimulating the birth rate of white Americans — the main carriers of technological and industrial skills, the main creators of new knowledge. It was necessary for the state to provide housing to young families under the condition that they have no less than three children. That is, it was necessary to force Americans to reduce consumerism and entertainment and to force more work and saving.

Finally, it was necessary to declare a U.S. default — otherwise the country’s enormous national debt problem cannot be solved — then to discard the old dollar and to create a North American autarkic empire with half a billion people — a block with the U.S., Canada, Mexico, possibly with the involvement of England, Australia and New Zealand in the new Empire.

That is, it was necessary to create a hybrid policy of F. Roosevelt, A. Hitler, H. Perone and B. Mussolini. This was the only rescue for the Yankees.

But instead of a new Roosevelt, only Obama came. Americans call him a liberal, but it is just an American aberration. Since the middle of the 20th century, Yankees have called typical social democrats liberals. Obama is just a "pink" social democrat, whereas classical liberals with low taxes and minimum state control requirements are just Romney and the Republicans. (Crooker makes himself clear even here: They call liberals the conservatives).

In the end, Obama failed: He began a program to increase taxes on the rich and to increase social spending, but completely failed to begin a program to construct a new infrastructure. He could not, like Roosevelt, provide jobs for millions of people by constructing new highways, railways, bridges, dams, etc. Moreover, Obama’s electorate does not seek hard work at all. And Republican governors, at such moments, blocked similar undertakings. But Obama, irritating all normal white people, was all for protecting tolerance, sexual deviants and other nonsense. Obama couldn't begin a new industrialization and end the neoliberal marasmus of the economy: He did not have the will or [right] people to do it. He didn't begin to engage in the high-profile revelations of 2001 (who was the architect of September 11?); he decided not to investigate the circumstances of the militant foreign policy and economic suicide that the Bush junior administration dragged America into from 2000 to 2008.

Obama's new governance is gloom and deadlock by its very definition.

Though the white Romney would be at the same stalemate as well, but it does not matter now.

White Deadlock

The issue is that the unsatisfied white majority is also disorganized. They have no advanced program and worthy leaders.

What kind of vanguard could the whites have? National socialism is a new option. Right wing in policy, but a socialist approach to the economy (see above). That is, rich people are to be pressed, but not in the interest of the migrated herd and legions of dependents but for the sake of supporting strong and hard-working white families, for the sake of a new industrialization and the revival of white Americans’ viability.

And to the role of leaders of the discontented whites, all kinds of freaks were nominated. For example, Republicans and "tea partyers" (analogues exist in Russia) who mix white nationalism with laissez-faire capitalism. That is completely incompatible! Capitalism is by its nature anti-nationalist and leads to both the impoverishment of the majority and the decline of whites’ birth rate. This is what Maxim Kalashnikov argued in dozens of his articles and several books. The realization of the tea party and Ron Paul’s dreams will lead the U.S. straight to neo-feudalism, scientific and technical degradation, and an archaic bog (M.K. “Fighting Rams of the Capital,” September 2011, http://forum-msk.org/material/fpolitic/7182177.html). Thus neither Republicans, nor tea partyers could offer a coherent program to solve the U.S. debt problem.

Thus, whites appeared disoriented and overwhelmed on the dead end road. Now they have opted for the territorial division of the U.S. That is, they eventually will destroy themselves, for they will lose one of the main features of the white race: industrial, scientific and technical power — possible only in a single imperial state.

In general, the U.S. is in a deadlock. Democracy fails, for democracy and general elections lead to the victory of Obama-lovers: Not only migrants and nonwhites, but also disoriented white citizens who are more concerned about gay marriage than industrialization. But totalitarianism — the creation of a rigid, updated technocratic regime and reindustrialization — in the U.S. is also not possible. There is not sufficient political force for this purpose. Likewise, it does not exist in popular consciousness.

Death of the Empire? Or New Empire After All?

Therefore, I think, events in the U.S. — thus around the world — will follow the worst case scenario, the disintegration and chaos scenario.

In the 2012 elections the American establishment (rich men) showed that it (they) had degenerated and tried to escape from making difficult decisions. They preferred Brezhnev's, “Take it as it comes.” It resembles the fluctuating Putin system in Russia and behavior of the Soviet governors from 1979 to 1985. It, is needless to say, to what end such “elite” behavior comes.

If there is a miracle and the American aristocracy is able to cope with the current threat of U.S. disintegration, it should go for extremely drastic measures and force a transition to the “Mao [Zedong] option.” That is, U.S. default, the introduction of a new currency and the formation of a North American autarkic block (http://m-kalashnikov.livejournal.com/1247311.html). And this, by the way, may require a cover: The U.S. working actively to destroy Russia and to create another center of blood and chaos in our country, so the American redneck frightened by the sight of Russian terror calms down and submits to unpopular measures by the authorities.

On the Threshold of the Era of Revolts and Wars

We stand on the threshold of an era of world chaos. The collapse of the second — after the USSR — superpower will lead to the most savage consequences. The world will sink into a series of disintegrations, revolutions, revolts, and terrible social and economic disasters. A new division of the world will begin with a fight for status among new world powers.

Is Russia ready for it? No. Though, personally I urged the foolish Kremlin to prepare for such a turn of history. And I did so for many years in a row.

And Russia approaches this bloody turn of history in its worst "physical shape."

Will Russia Will Be Able to Stand?

Let's see if Russia is ready for world chaos. Let us examine each point.

First. Food security. It is not ready! Forty million hectares of arable, Soviet lands abandoned after 1991 have not been put into work circulation. Instead of this, the Putin system was to throw money away on soccer, the Olympics and other slime, and even simply “communize” money. Russia’s dependence on imported foods is not less than fifty percent. At the same time, the moronic authorities are ready to reduce Russia’s agrarian sector even more, having joined the World Trade Organization and accepted pernicious conditions for our village.

Second. A stable system, the maximum number of independent settlements — futuroplises, cities with single family houses. They do not exist and are not planned.

Third. The formation of a system of actual state investments to support Russia’s indigenous people’s birth rate, the construction of housing for young families, a vast scope of quality education and training for youth. This also does not exist in Russia.

Fourth. A reindustrialization, the creation of reasonable industrial and economic policies, and the investment of raw material export earnings not into the dollar and euro, not into the debt securities of foreign states, but into the construction of new Russian infrastructure and a modern productive sector. All this has completely failed. Instead, entrance into the World Trade Organization took place, which completely blocks the possibility of reindustrialization of the country.

Fifth. The creation of a sovereign ruble system, the abandonment of the policy of pumping of money to the West, the rejection of the “currency board” regime, the application of issuances to ensure reindustrialization and industrial growth, the central bank’s submission to the government. There is not even a hint of it! The banking system of Russia is sickly weak and dependent on the West. In fact, we do not have it.

Sixth. The creation — on the basis of reindustrialization, of reasonable industrial policy and the formation of a sovereign ruble system in Russia — of a Russian autarky out of its economic empire, that is the block based on Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Transdniestria and Kazakhstan, analogous with the possible North American block, the EU, the Chinese empire, and the New Ottoman Empire. And here — a failure, because there is no basis for such integration.

Seventh. The toughest fight against corruption and the formation of a new ruling class made from practitioners, production workers, technocrats and nationalists. Obviously, this is not even close. The authorities are inept, thievish, untalented persons.

Eighth. Powerful armed forces and an operational defense industry. Here, I think, comments are unnecessary. Here, Russians have literally crushed everything.

All this allows us to conclude: Russia itself can easily collapse during the world chaos and become prey to the empires that are forming in its neighborhood. For in the future world distemper the nation-states are doomed: New empires will devour them with all their belongings, having turned dwarf nations either into provinces or into colonies. The Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan bear the same risk of becoming prey. Central Asia, apparently, also will be divided between China, Iran and certain new Islamic formations. Thus, without a doubt, in the deepening of global distemper in the emptying and endangered lands of Russia and Ukraine, the massive resettlement of the impoverished Muslim population from Turkestan will begin.

This is what I see now, comrades …

*Translator’s note: Pindostan is a satirical Russian term for the U.S. "Yankeeland" would be an approximate comparison.



Be The First To Comment



Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.