The more I’ve thought about potential solutions to the gigantic mess we have found ourselves in as a species, the more I have come to believe we need to break apart into a vast multitude of city-states. The revolutionary concept of America in the first place was this idea of “self-governance,” something we do not posses an iota of in this day and age. As was noted recently in an academic paper published by Princeton and Northwestern, these United States have mutated into nothing short of an oligarchy. In fact, the study demonstrated that the will of the people has essentially zero impact on legislation whatsoever.
In centuries prior, the idea of “representative-democracy” in which people elect people to represent their interests in a far off capital seemed like a reasonable solution to a very real problem. Information took a very long time to get from one place to another, so you had to trust someone else to essentially negotiate for you on issues of national significance. Moreover, in such a disconnected world, centralization was not only more efficient, it seemed like the only way. As such, things became highly centralized, so much so that things have now morphed into a global oligarchy that wields almost total power. Meanwhile, the billions of plebs have no say whatsoever in the affairs that govern their lives; including whether they will be financially secure, posses any civil liberties at all or end up in jail for a wide litany of non-violent “crimes.”
With the incredible tools we now possess, thanks primarily to the Internet, we no longer need centralization of government. Nor do we really need representatives to vote for us on the issues that most greatly affect out lives. As any American understands, the diversity of cultural, economic, and political sentiments vary greatly throughout the land. It’s not just the obvious ones, such as the differences between “northerners” and “southerners,” but wide discrepancies exists within states themselves. For example, Austin is nothing like much of the rest of Texas, and the Denver/Boulder area where I live is very distinct from much of the rest of Colorado. The examples are simply too many to list, but I am of the belief that people are capable of, and should be free to, decide the most important things that affect their lives at a local level (with the exception of obvious things such as violence or aggression toward one another).
The founding fathers’ original idea of many “United States” allowed for different ideals to be expressed in a wide variety of ways, and is in my opinion one of the most advantageous attributes of our nation. But why stop there? Why not allow different areas and municipalities break off even further into far more autonomous type structures than we have today?
Of course many people will answer, what about slavery? The truth of the matter is that this abomination in the United States seemingly had to be resolved through a bloody conflict given the economic interests in the south at the time. The founders decided one war was enough, and let this horrible practice be tackled almost a hundred years later through violent conflict. I hope that we have advanced enough as a species that we can come to a global consensus that certain things are illegal everywhere. Slavery, murder, rape, etc. Other than these (and other) obvious evils we can all agree on, decentralized legislation seems to make sense to me in this day and age. While I strongly disagree with “global government” a global consensus on certain things we can all agree upon as reprehensible anywhere on earth seems completely reasonable.
With that in mind, the man who recently purchased the entire 30,000 Silk Road Bitcoins from the feds has proposed to break California into six separate parts. The measure has already collected “far more than the 800,000 signatures” needed to to get it on the state ballot.
Like Hollywood or Manhattan, Silicon Valley occupies a singular place on the American cultural and economic landscape. Unlike those other locales, however, the Valley’s more idiosyncratic political leanings have led to murmurings of secession more typical of rural hinterlands that already feel cut off through sheer physical isolation. That chatter has culminated in a measure that appears headed for the statewide ballot to split California into six separate states, of which Silicon Valley would be one.
While ostensibly a plan to make the entire state of 38 million people more governable, the six-state initiative is being led and funded by a member of the Silicon Valley elite, many of whom would no doubt welcome the increased political clout that would likely come from carving out their own statehood. In the hands of most, the six-state initiative would look like a pure stunt. But with Silicon Valley behind it, this effort’s chances at the ballot box can’t be dismissed out of hand. Unlike most other would-be revolutionaries, Silicon Valley has a long record of taking ideas that sound outlandish at the time—affordable computers in every home, private rocket ships—and managing to make them real. It also has a seemingly endless stream of money that, combined with heavy doses of ingenuity and shamelessness, give its goofball ideas the fuel they need to take off.
Leading the six-state push is Tim Draper, a wealthy third-generation venture capitalist known for his theatrics. He hosts the superhero-themed Draper University of Heroes, a kind of motivational cram session for would-be startup entrepreneurs, and once wore a Captain America costume himself on a magazine cover. Last month, he bought nearly 30,000 bitcoins auctioned off by the U.S. Marshals Service after authorities had seized them from online black market Silk Road. In short, he’s exactly the kind of guy with the time, money, and temperament to push a wacky-sounding ballot measure.
“Our gift to California is this—it’s one of opportunity and choice,” Draper said at a press conference yesterday where he announced the campaign had collected far more than 800,000 signatures needed to get the measure on the ballot. “We’re saying, make one failing government into six great states.”
The campaign in favor of the measure argue that six states will mean six state governments more responsive to local concerns, rather than the unwieldy process of orchestrating the state’s 158,000 square miles entirely from Sacramento.
With the six-state proposal, the Californian Ideology appears to be seeking out its final, fullest, most ironic realization by underwriting Silicon Valley’s emancipation from California itself.
And why wouldn’t Silicon Valley seek to be free? Through the lens of its own sensibility, at least, California looks like the worst kind of incumbent, an ancient and inefficient institution mired in old ways of doing business, a monopolist that holds onto power through manipulation, not innovation. To six-state supporters, holding onto the idea of a single California represents, at best, an irrational sentimentality, a commitment to the past grounded in lazy logic and unexamined assumptions. Breaking up California is exactly the kind of “disruption” that titillates the venture capitalist imagination. In the process, the new state of Silicon Valley—which would stretch from San Francisco to Monterey–would also, conveniently, separate its great and greatly concentrated wealth from the poorer parts of the state.
The Valley’s “hacker way” has so far proven a clumsy fit for the strategic complexity of the political process, which relies more on realism than idealism. Before California would officially break up, per the U.S. Constitution, the existing state legislature would still have to sign off, which it’s unlikely to do for a host of reasons, not least being the tax revenue lost to Silicon Valley seceding. Congress would also have to approve what would amount to the dilution of its own power by granting California twelve senators instead of the current two.
At this point, I’d like to make it clear I don’t think this will become a reality in the near-term. In fact, it is likely that decentralization will first occur in the economic and technological areas of human society way before it happens on the political level. The reasons for this should be obvious.
We are already seeing decentralization take over in all sorts of economic areas. Information flow in general and alternative media specifically, currency (Bitcoin), transportation (Uber, Lyft), and manufacturing (3D-printing). When the political process fully implodes in the West, we’ll look to decentralized successes in other areas and apply them to politics.
I believe the current overly centralized paradigm parasitically engulfing the planet will experience a series of spectacular collapses in the years ahead that will make 2008 look like practice. As the centralized beast episodically implodes upon itself, we will have a historic chance to remake our world in a new way that will better serve humanity. That new paradigm will consist of freedom through decentralization, and I can’t wait to see it.
In fact, it’s already started.
For recent articles on our generation’s most significant battle; Centralization vs. Decentralization, check out the following articles:
Ex-CIA Officer Claims that Open Source Revolution is About to Overthrow Global Oligarchy
Networks vs. Hierarchies: Which Will Win? Niall Furguson Weighs In
In Liberty,
Michael Krieger
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G
Follow me on Twitter.
balkanizing california is the same idea as the EU supporting the ‘independence’ of multiple city states in europe like milan and venice.
the strategy of balkanzation is to empower city states at the expense of their regional headquarter national states, in order to generate more support for the empire headquarters.
a balkanized california would have far less power as a group of entities, than they now possess through the legislature and executive headquartered in sacramento. but deriving much of its power from the money centers of silicon valley and los angeles. Of course washington D.C. is the major beneficiary in such a scenario and New York City and the too big too fail banks , by extension.
the immidiate beneficiaries will of course be the wealthiest power center states that off shoot from california, the san francisco municipality would gain enormously to the detrment of northern california—at least in a financial sense, as it is northern califonia that receives the benefit of the tax surplus over its tax payments to the state government on a per capita basis.
while the fairy tales about the benefits of ‘independence’ from politically entrenched interests may appeal to the inner libertarians and anarchists who may live in the the rural northern and central california, the reality is going to come down to where the money flows. the rearrangement of flow of money will shrink their economies (and their governments as well)
This pattern of balkanization was the targeted outcome by prussia against the austrian hungarian empire. to balkanize a region is to weaken its central command. in this case, the state institution of california itself would be weakened. As the largeset state in the union, california is a the most significant STATE entity vis-a-vis Washington D.C federal government. While some people may argue New York State is also significant, the reality is that it is New York City , not the state as a whole, that plays this function. Regardless, the bankster headquarters of New York City function in concert with DC, and would be very supportive of such a plan to balkanize California, further isolating the rural areas and depriving them of revenue to the benefit of silicon valley, hyper-urbanism, and of course, municipal bond markets…..
it is , at best, juvenile to believe that somehow breaking up california, a STATE insitution which backstops aggression by the federal government, would serve the public liberty better by balkanizing.
One might argue that 6 separate entitites would provide a more fertile ground for experimentation in democracy. This is childish nonsense however as all things being equal smaller states have less power than integrated larger unions. And thus a balkanized california into 6 pieces creates six smaller and more easily divided and conquered political opponents for the federal government.
consider the opposite possibiltiies
1) a plan to join the 4 biggest states of the western US , california oregon washington and nevada into one super state.
and
2) A plan to re-assign over 99% of federal lands back to California and to re-assign 99% of administrative control for immigration (INS CIS) , education (DOE), tobacco and firearms (ATF), and drugs (DEA) to the STATE of california itself, administration of non-profit status property tax exemptions ( IRS can obviate state property tax obligations through non-profit status ). away from the federal alphabet soup administrative system.
how do both of the above plans compare with the so called ‘libertarian’ goals of balkanizing california. in case 1, it depends what the outcome of the super state government policy is. 1 thing for sure, that state will have far more bargaining power against the federal government specifically with regards to land policy and plenty of land out west i federal. much of it can just be given away in a new homestead act to totally eviscerate artificial wall street created shortages of housing. no mortgages, free land in return for property. This would instantly render New York securitization based mortgage origination dead in the water in the west.
in case 2, it is obvious that the balkanized states will be subject to all federal oversights as the state of califonia already currently is.
my point is, when poeople in california say california is ‘unmanageable’. what they really mean to say is, the federal government of the united states is unmanageable and through federal legalization of extraordinarily predatory financial behavior much of which , if not all, is perpetrated through new york city , delaware, and a couple of other offshore jurisdictions—-the state of california, much like many other states of the union, is now bankrupt insolvent and heading in to the shitter.
Teslark has a big brain. I appreciate his commentary.
you know , i just read what i wrote, it’s written horribly , but i tend to write fast and never edit internet comments as i feel sheepish for even commenting on blogs and such , knowing that it’s pointless most of the time. that said i generally enjoy reading zerohedge comments. so instead of simply lurking, i do try and chime in now and again.
my brain is indeed too big and too fast and writes like shit. and i hope you did like the commentary. just some thoughts…..
if you were being cynical, i dig it. 🙂
p.s. if they wanted to have a higher chance of the ballot succeeding, the douchebags wouldn’t call the bay area ‘silicon valley’. it’s douchey and i think if other people had to vote on ‘silicon valley’ being a state as opposed to bayside california or western california or middle-bay or something.
silicon fuckin valldouchian is unacceptable.
Top of the day Michael…..wanted to share with one there an idea of an idea….here is an honest look at the History of America…….http://blog.ucadia.com/2014/07/true-history-of-america-part-1-1666.html
titled: True History of America -Part 1 (1666-1840): The Curse against the Patriots
and here is the second part of the three part blog…
http://blog.ucadia.com/2014_07_01_archive.html
titled True History of America Part 2 (1840-1939): The False God of Perpetual War
and here is a lin to the financial system …….again fully on line on the block chain…for full transparancy….the UFS model
http://blog.ucadia.com/2013/10/the-ucadia-financial-system-model.html and
last is the UFS sullary of elements
https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.com/audio/2013/ufs_elements.pdf
praise yah for your incredible work and dedication to exposing the fraud….one here always reads you stories on MAxkeiser.com financial wars……and maybe you will see that the Ulitimate Solution to the Financial Wars is a new complete system based on the Golder Rule of Law and the divine prosperity which we all deserve.
I encourage one there being a man to check out this material…..as a man.
thanks again Michael!
sincerely,
thomas ford McFadden
contributer and member of the Cherokee nation of Indians
Ucadia.com and One-Heaven.org
Shalom and “Wado”
be well ……….and be safe….and be at peace….tfM
Thanks, that was an awesome read. It’s mentioned at the end “our generation’s most significant battle; Centralization vs. Decentralization.” I just wanted to mention that Growth vs. Sustainability is another important, and maybe the ultimate, one.
-psd
It would be nice to think that slavery, directly or indirect, will be wiped from the earth. Slavery though still remains a problem in poorer counties of the world today. The sex slave business seems to be going on too around the world.
I think in the west one of the greatest promoter that ended the practice of slavery was the industrial revolution, credited with beginning in England and spreading from there through out the world. The creation and use of cheaply powered machines to replace human labor has led to a better life for many. Hopfully that will remain true into the future. If that should change, less machines used, I’d guess that many sadly would revert to old ways of doing, in one fashion or another.
When I lived in California, from what I remember a big issue between different sections of the Bear state was water usage. With the current drought, it wouldn’t surprise me if this issue of splitting the state is looked at more deeply compared to other times.
Divide and conquer. While there are issues with over reach by centralized powers, this particular plan reeks of an oligarch’s wet dream.
Shit as far as I am concerned break it into a thousnad gd pieces. They can start their own itty bitty confrederacy!
Breaking up California? Seriously bad idea.
What has Google done for San Francisco? Driven up rents, put in their own private buses, driven out regular folk who don’t belong to the tech money club.
We need to stop focusing on governments – big or small – and start thinking about our communities and how to protect them from corporate takeover.
A critique on this plan could be that if you alter the States, either by breaking them up or merging them into super-States, the power-elites will make sure States’ rights will be lost. Therefore, breaking up the States seems like a bad idea.