If you look across history, empires tend to grow in size during periods of relative macro stability and splinter into smaller states in more volatile times. To attribute regional ascendance to SF feels like the stretchiest of stretches to me, when history is sitting right there.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
For me it’s not about autonomy but about political representation. I think the policy and politics of an Allied Pacific States (California, Oregon, Washington) would look very different from the contemporary US in ways that are very appealing to me/becoming existentially vital.
-
The thing I keep returning to is that if we remove a bunch of blue states from the Union, what's left is a more radicalized right wing United States that's still got nuclear weapons, and I don't like that thought. It is a bad thought.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Political representation should map to economic footprint. I don’t know exactly what you mean by autonomy. Who expects that from any state or country in a globalized world? But the tax base should be represented as one bloc, and not broken up across 3 states or countries.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.