Encyclopedia of Opinion
Question
Should the U.S. break up into smaller distinct nations?
Position1 of 2›
Yes, the US should break into smaller nations
Argument‹3 of 3

Americans see it coming and welcome it

George Washington once wrote, “The establishment of our new Government seemed to be the last great experiment for promoting human happiness.” Yet today, no American seems truly satisfied.

The argument

Americans see the split of the country coming and might even welcome it. The enormity of the United States could facilitate this economic and social split. For example, California on its own two feet has the fifth largest economy in the world, proving that it could certainly survive on its own. In fact, California has taken steps to do just that already. After Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, Governor Jerry Brown of California — who has claimed “we are a separate nation in our own minds” — crossed the Pacific to negotiate a bilateral carbon-emissions pact with Chinese president Xi Jinping. “It’s true I didn’t come to Washington, I came to Beijing,” said Brown, who is often treated like a head of state when he travels abroad. Already, a fellow international superpower like China recognizes the autonomy of a state like California. Californians, who may identify more so with the East coast than the country that divides them, may welcome this expression of individuality. Other heavy hitting states, for instance New York, Florida, and Texas, may be inclined to follow a similar model.

Premises

[P1]The enormity of the United States could facilitate an economic and social split that many Americans see coming and might welcome. [P2] California alone has the world's fifth-largest economy and has already acted independently, as when Governor Brown negotiated a carbon pact directly with China. [P3] With China treating California as autonomous and heavy-hitting states like New York, Florida, and Texas able to follow, such splits look feasible. [C] Therefore, because Americans see it coming and welcome it, the US should break into smaller nations.

Counter-arguments

Complaining about the state of the country is a national favorite pastime, trying to succeed from it is a different ball game altogether. Americans will recall from history class, the last time someone tried, it didn’t go so well, with sudden surges of patriotism filling Americans everywhere. Happiness is relative, if the nation were to break up, it would be very easy to find something else to complain about, very quickly.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Neither half of the premise is supported: no measure is offered of how many Americans expect a break-up, and none at all that they would welcome it — surveys on secession have found it a minority position even in the states most often named. [Rejecting P2] Economic size shows that a state could be viable, not that it should separate, and a governor negotiating an emissions agreement was acting within a federal system that permits subnational arrangements — evidence of latitude inside the union rather than of departure from it. [Rejecting P3] Foreign courtesy toward the governor of a large state is diplomacy, not recognition of sovereignty, and the states listed differ so sharply in politics and economy that their being large is no reason to expect them to follow one another.