...the more they stay the same.

Elements of the Democratic Party have again found their historical embrace of states' rights (good for them), but also...secession. *cue omnious music*.

Here's the roundup.

Salon

Slate

Tech Central Station

National Review

Secession constitutes a repudiation of republican government as understood by the Founders....When the States ratified the Constitution of 1787, they pledged that they would accept the results of elections conducted according to its rules. In violation of this pledge, the Southern States seceded because they did not like the outcome of the election of 1860. Thus secession is the interruption of the constitutional operation of republican government, substituting the rule of the minority for that of the majority.

My two-cents?

I'm a Republican (but hardly a conservative). But I'm also loyal to the pure Blue States, and as I noted (and many others have done), the red/blue divide is largely a fallacy.

But could modern-day secession and even a Second Civil War really work?

Uh, no. Of course not. As they did in the 1860s, Republican interests control the bulk of American big business and big industry. Sure, the statisitcs show that the Blue States subsidize some of economically underdeveloped Reds, but states don't pay taxes, individuals do. And the rich people pay most of the taxes, and rich people skew Republican. So Republican/Unionists would have a financial and productivity edge over their Democratic/Secessionist opponents. Provided of course that Blue State guerrillas don't blow up GOP-held Blue State factories. But where would these Demo guerrillas get the weapons to blow up weapons factories to begin with? Ah, the rub.

The Union would also have the great majority of the military support, as some 80% (?) voted for Bush. (I've heard this number bandied about on the radio. Sorry, I don't have an official source.) This is historically a reverse of the Civil War, in which the bulk of the U.S. Army officer corps came from the South, and remained loyal to their homeland. It's easy to imagine this same regionalism taking root in today's Army, only in a different cause, to save the Union rather than destroy it.

(Nixon's Southern Strategy continues to pay off!)

In terms of Moral Causes, the Civil War II would be harder to quantify. The Republican/Unionists would love to finally, legally call their Demo opponents traitors and un-American. But, the pure Blues would have an exceedingly strong moral argument of their own. For them, secession is a means to free the gays and preserve a woman's rights.

Inversely, the Republican/Unionists would maintain that Civil War II is the long-awaited real-life battle to perserve the rights of the unborn (a cause that many GOPsters directly link to the party's earlier opposition to slavery).

Man, what a mess. I don't even want to think of the fate that would befall Democratic governors in Union states, and Republican governors in Secession states. I see lots of executions. Lots. Oooh, but think of the fun we could have with crazy border states! New Hampshire would go crazy. And poor Pennsylvania (Asa's fatherland) would probably rip in three.