Apparently he has become the darling of the Russian media, and is getting frequent interviews about his prediction of the USA's breakup in 2010, a prediction he made back in 1998. The problem is that the Russian media has become more state controlled again, and there may be a bit of wishful thinking on their part, having experienced their own country's breakup in 1991.
While I agree with the reasons Panarin puts forth as to why the breakup will occur, I don't see it happening in 2010. I also find lots to disagree with as to what the post breakup map will look like. (See the map below.) Here are some of the articles highlights:
Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces.
He based the forecast on classified data supplied to him by former Soviet analysts, he says. He predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S. When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union. Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow. The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in.
California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.
U.S. foreign debt is a "a pyramid scheme," and he predicts that China and Russia would usurp Washington's role as a global financial regulator.
Americans hope President-elect Barack Obama "can work miracles, but when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles."
The line about the wealthier states actually withholding funds is interesting, but that would mean the smaller states, as the large states like California and New York are already begging the Feds for their own bailout money, as they are in the red with their budgets. A very large number of the smaller states would have to withhold funds for the threat to be effective.
Also the line about Alaska going back to Russia, and Russia becoming a global financial regulator (ever heard of the EU?) seem to be written for Russian anti-American types only.
I also disagree with the part about foreign influence, I would see these groups of states becoming independent countries, with only Mexico having a strong influence in the Southwest. The part about Canada having influence over the tan colored "Central North American Republic" is absurd, that grouping alone would still be bigger than Canada in both population and GDP.
I also question the way Panarin splits the Old South in two, and splits Arizona and New Mexico. I would see both of them in one group, again under the influence of Mexico.
To sum up, while Panarin's theory is interesting, it seems to me to show a lack of understanding about the regional ethnic differences that exist in America, and wouldn't be a likely final scenario.
3 comments:
I'm not entirely clear on why you (and Panarin) think the US will collapse due to economic pressure. Why wouldn't you expect the US to simply default on its debt or devalue its currency? Were it to do so, the fallout for the rest of the world would be far more severe than the United States, as millions of foreign creditors, notably sovereign wealth funds, would find themselves out billions of dollars in much-needed capital. Since other countries (notably and recently Brazil) have followed exactly this course when confronted with looming debt and economic instability in the past, that seems a far more likely scenario than the US nobly allowing itself to slide into bankruptcy and be picked apart by creditors.
Furthermore, the US is now well into its third century of existence, and currently lacks any single, divisive issue (such as slavery posed in the 19th century) with the kind of wide-reaching economic and political ramifications necessary to split the country into even two pieces. Your (and Panarin's) thesis seems to me to be largely a function of wishful thinking. Frankly, if anyone in the world is likely to break up in the ongoing economic crisis, I'd bet on China, with further fragmentation of Russia running a strong second. After all, both of these nations have strong ethnic enclaves, and both have totalitarian regimes whose ability to generate wealth for the people is their primary pillar of popular support If that ability erodes, there's very little standing between either regime and a nasty power struggle in which ethnic enclaves such as those in eastern and southern Russia and western China might well successfully stage a breakaway or defect to other nations (Hong Kong to Taiwan, for instance).
Adams said, in part, "...currently lacks any single, divisive issue ..."
I think that this overlooks what is rapidly become a huge issue in this country. Our governing elites are bent on a program to replace the original stock of this nation with a new people comprised of mestizos and muzlim "refugees" recruited from the middle east in sufficient numbers to substantially change the demographics of the country.
Look to what has happened in England to see our future. The British have brough in large numbers of people from their former overseas colonies, and more recently from all parts of the world, particularly muzlim countries. The native Brits are almost completely beat down and have completely lost control of their country. Recently a muzlim "lord" made threats and prevented another member of the House of Lords from having a private meeting in the House of Lords to show the anti-muzlim movie "Fitna." He then when to the Pakistani press and crowed about what great victory this was for izlam. England is a microcosm of our own future if we do not wake up and take action to stop the current course of events.
Our new BO administration has let it be known that it will shortly be working on efforts to erase our national boundaries, make illegal aliens superior in many respect to native born citizens in that they will get many preferences in terms of education and other social benefits, and generally move to make Americans second class citizens in the USA.
Our traitorous governing elites are a very divisive issue. This includes not just BO and his administration, but almost all of Congress as well. We have to bring the government back to the people and restore the Constitution.
I disagree with your comment about how Canada having influence over the "Central North American Republic" is absurd. These states would probably seek out Canada, as they would not want to be conquered by a different American nation during the civil war. However, I do agree that, in the end, most of the Central North American Republic will probably be independent, with only some cities and/or states choosing to join Canada officially. They entire Republic will, however, be occupied by Canada and NATO during the Civil War. I don't think Canada would take the Central North American Republic by force. Although I believe that Russia may take Alaska by force, I think that the southern trailing part of Alaska near British Columbia will become part of Canada, simply because the Canadian government would be stupid not to take this area during Alaskan chaos. More specifically, it would be to control the mouths of rivers from Yukon. Canada would probably be able to take this land peacefully, simply by making a border treaty with Russia to avoid conflict. Hawaii will go to Japan, no question. If it doesn't, Japanese people will buy land on Hawaii until Japan owns it. As for the south, I doubt Mexico will take it. More likely, drug cartels will take it. Either way, the resistance to the invasion put up by the southern states would probably allow China to capture Arizona, so I don't think Arizona will willingly join California, but I think they may be forced to do so.
Now, if the question is brought up: "Why would China get involved?," China would want to be compensated for all the money America owes it, and will obviously never pay it.
As for Atlantic America, I think that will still be the United States of America, and if it does join the European Union, it will do because it has no army and needs protection. What about the current US Military? The soldiers would either fight for their home state, or join try to work with NATO to save as many lives as possible. I know Panarin doesn't say this, but if the US joins the EU, I bet Israel will too. Maybe with European mediators, the Middle East will finally find a solution, but that's not a prediction, just hope. As for the exact borders of the new nations, I think that it's "give or take." I wouldn't be surprised if Florida joined Cuba or Canada. Cuba - because of the huge Cuban population; Canada - because of the tourists and Universal Health Care.
To conclude: The Californian Republic will be taken to pay off debt to China, Hawaii will be taken either by occupation or systematic purchasing, Alaska will be taken quickly by force, The Texas Republic will be a bloody war-zone long after the war (just like Northern Mexico), The Central North-American Republic will be occupied, but not conquered, by Canada and NATO, and Atlantic America will be all that's left of the USA, and will join the EU to protect it from China and Texas.
Post a Comment