Russia Predicts: "America will Die in 2010!" Big Whiskey Responds: "Huh. No Shit."

So the other day I came across an article which ran last week in The Wall Street Journal, featuring the theories of Russian political analyst Igor Panarin. Panarin, a “U.S. expert” and former KGB agent, has been predicting for the past decade that the United States will dissolve and cease to exist as we know it in the year 2010. From the article:

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.

Moreover, he predicts that the end result of this will be the splitting of the U.S. into six territories. The west cost, basically from Utah on over, will be the California Republic, and likely be controlled by or under the influence of China. The midwestern states north of Oklahoma will be absorbed by Canada. The northern east coast will constitute Atlantic America, which he says will likely join the European Union. The southern states from New Mexico on east will form the Texas Republic, and be controlled by Mexico. Hawaii will be independent with heavy ties to Japan, and, of course, Alaska will run back into the waiting arms of Mother Russia.

Obviously, the specifics of this split are inherently flawed. In fact, they’re comically flawed. Mr. Panarin does appear to have a somewhat deficient understanding of demographics, and is certainly pig ignorant of the socio-political demographics of America. Utah under Chinese rule? Idaho? Please. Mexico takes over the southeast? Those states can pool more resources, money and manpower than all of Mexico combined. If anything, they might extend their southern border all the way to Guatemala. The northeast join the EU? The EU wouldn’t have them, and even if they would, the EU is in and of itself highly disorganized and its member states can’t seem to agree on anything. Besides, anyone who’s ever met a native Kentuckian or Virginian knows there’s not much chance of them becoming part of European society. As for Canada controlling the northern midwest, the states in question hold a population which exceeds Canada’s by nearly twenty million. Pretty tough to absorb that.

Even all of this notwithstanding, the real fault lines of dissent in America are not tied to geographic regions, as is more common in Europe. Rather, they fall primarily along the lines of race, socio-economic status, and ideology.

But while Panarin’s predictions for the future map of the continent may be based on some very faulty thinking, the idea of serious internal conflict, or even dissolution of the union as we know it, is far from impossible. At least I think as much. And Panarin’s ascribed reasons are pretty much spot on.

Riddle me this: what do you assume would happen if a society were to allow, willingly, unchecked masses of people from another society to move in on their turf? Moreover, let’s assume the newcomers’ society has a vastly different culture than that of the hosts’. One which has different values; has historically performed very poorly in the sciences, arts, and everything else; has never been able to create or maintain an economy beyond that of the third world; brings with it a great degree of criminality; and for a number of reasons both real and imaginary (but mostly imaginary), holds a deep seated resentment and even hostility toward the host society. To sauce things up even more, let’s assume a language barrier keeps most members of the two groups from communicating with each other.

What comes next? Do you suppose the two groups will learn to love each other and all get together and buy the world a Coke and sing Kumbaya and just become one big happy family? Or are you not an abject retard?

Obviously, the host society in this scenario is signing its own death warrant. Equally, and painfully, obvious is that America - and Europe, for that matter - is doing exactly this. Face it folks, our immigration situation is a problem (if any of you are wondering: yes, this is where Whiskey the eeeeevil racist rears his ugly head). We are importing Mexicans, Central/South Americans, and more to the tune of millions every year, and make no mistake about it, we’re not getting the cream of the crop.

”But Whiskey!” perhaps you gasp in self righteous disgust, “We’re a nation of immigrants! If it weren’t for this same kind of immigration from Europe, there wouldn’t even be an America!”

All true. Ask an Indian just how well that one worked out.

They key difference here is that despite the various quirks and misgivings between the Irish, Polish, English, Italians, or whatever, they all came from comparatively similar cultures, had similar values, and ultimately assimilated well into America’s European-based society. The mestizos flowing in from the south are not doing so, or at least not at a sufficient rate. More often than not, their loyalties lie with their country of birth, instead of their new chosen home. The cultures clash. The net result is balkanization, the necessary first step toward conflict.

Panarin next cites economic decline as the next ingredient in America’s suicide cocktail. Not hard to figure that one out. Piss poor countries where the people have little to lose are always more prone to violent civil wars and revolutions, usually of questionable wisdom. The same could hold true of Americans. If we were to find ourselves in a sufficiently shite situation, we may resort to truly radical and/or desperate measures. But the fact that we still have more to lose by doing so is, methinks, the primary reason we haven’t had any real civil wars or secessions during the last century or so (and likely won’t between now and 2010). The American economy has it’s ups and downs, as do all economies. People are freaking out about this little hiccup we’re experiencing right now, but this country has seen much worse, and will again. As of yet, Americans have always found a way to pull themselves back up. This, I believe, is where the distinctly American “Fuck you, I’ll do it myself” attitude truly shines at it brightest. When left to their own devices, people of sufficient will, vision and intellect will find a way to improve their lot in life. Comparatively, America has these types of people in droves. When interacting with each other, in pursuit of their own self interests, the invariable result is economy. Of course, that’s when they’re left to their own devices. Throw in an outside factor which offsets productivity (by devaluing currency, confiscating profits, etc.) and the whole landscape changes. Most commonly, these outside factors are called “government.” Look to places like Zimbabwe for a good example of what happens in this scenario.

But the real crux of the matter is the last item on Panarin’s list. Moral degradation. This is where the water gets muddy, since people have different ideas of exactly what moral degradation and even morality itself actually are, or at least we pretend we do.

But I guess a safe and universal way to put it would be this: Americans like to behave badly. It’s one trait we do share with the rest of the world. We like to drive in ways that endanger everyone around us. We like to hurt people of whom we disapprove. We like to fornicate without paying any mind to the children we beget as a result. We like to buy things we know we can’t afford, with money we don’t have. The list goes on.

In short, we like to pursue immediate gratification with no regard for the consequences. But sooner or later those consequences have to be faced, the piper must be paid. And when the check bounces, bad things follow. A great example would be the housing and credit market crunches we’re seeing right now. A whole litany of people from high risk home buyers to unscrupulous lenders to crooked politicians to Wall street traders saw a get-rich-quick scheme in the field of bad mortgages, and when they didn’t get paid all hell broke loose.

More on that later.

So again, while I highly doubt Igor Panarin’s theory of the inevitable demise of America will come true next year, it’s still food for thought. What can be done about any of the pitfalls he (and I) cited? Beats me.

Personally, I suggest you pop open a cold Sam Adams, and join me in watching the freakshow unfold.

Wall Street Journal story on Igor Panarin