Came across this via Reddit... view here:
Russia Today interviews Igor Panarin, a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian foreign affairs ministry, who believes the economic crisis in the US has confirmed his long-held belief that the country is heading for extinction in its present form.
A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts. Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse." The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events. When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator." When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: "Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia." Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: "A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles." He also cited the "vulnerable political setup", "lack of unified national laws", and "divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions." He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
Brutus 2.0:1) I'm not sure what grounding this guy has other than vague speculations and hunches. He doesn't seem to understand the US all that well. 2) If it did happen, it might not be such a bad thing anyway.
I'm about to search more for this professor & his theory, but yeah, given time allotted on the newscast (3 mins, not including the delay for translation), it's not surprising if there is more to his theory that anything in-depth couldn't be covered.As for if it did happen, I agree that it might not be a bad thing. However, if New York were to become another center of power (similar to D.C., is what I gathered from he said), I'm not sure how the FSP would bode up north, honestly.
Brutus 2.0:We also have to consider the fact that, as far as I know, there are no remotely sizable citizen groups advocating for any kind of split of the US. I'm not sure who would institute the split and, if they did, who would agree. In fact, I would bet the farm that anyone who publicly advocated the theory of this split would be derided and laughed off any news show on which he appeared.
IMO, the split portion of his theory assumes too much (although, he doesn't give an exact time frame for when said 6 portions of the USA form, although one can assume fairly quickly if he doesn't give one, I suppose) , but I wouldn't be surprised if secession movements capitalized on the increasing dire situation to increase sympathy & activism for certain states to suceed (to my knowledge, that's already ocurring). I'm still not sure what states would suceede, regardless. Portions of it I could somewhat believe, specifically his comment regarding central states becoming a portion into itself due to native american population, as Lakota has recently popped up (although that's fairly unofficial stuff, from what I understand). Again, though, I think he has a sizeable assumption on his hand. I'm still unerved by that fact that he made this prediction back in 1998, however.Also, I found more background information here:[ from: http://www.stockhouse.com/Community-News/2008/December/1/Igor-Panarin-s-predictions-for-the-U-S- ]
(excerpt of the Panarin interview)"In September 1998 an international conference called the Informational War was held in Austria. I presented my analytical research there. 150 out of 400 participants were from the USA. There was outrageous shouting in the audience when I was talking about the division of America in my presentation.However my reasons were well-grounded. Back then it was obvious that finance and economy would be the main destructive power for the USA. The dollar was not secured by anything. The external debt of the country was growing like an avalanche in spite of the fact that it was non-existent at the beginning of the 1980s.In 1998, when I was making my forecast, it had reached 2 trillion dollars. Today it’s more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid which is bound to collapse."
I think it's inevitible, but not for what the economist assumes. First, there are the seeds for division in any society so long as they're 'exploited' to their fullest potential. Second, those seeds right now are very much dorment in the United States only due to the fact of interstate commerce as it is right now.
The only way there will be a significant push toward civil war is when (not a matter of if in my view point) two factors come to the foreground: total disregard for local governance (this is becoming obvious in some areas, but in others it's not obvious enough to make much of a divisive push yet) and total disregard for the economy as a whole (basically, what's the point of a united anything if the top government does everything in its power to bungle up the economy more so than the local ones?). These two are more or less starting right now (even though the latter has been with us since the start in many ways if you dig through history of the United States), and I suspect they'll grow as the measures to supposedly stimulate the economy make conditions worse (I don't expect civil war or division in 2010, more likely 2012 in respect to actually seeing organized proponents even in state/local governments for secession.).
Also, what bothers me is that there seems to be no concerted effort by libertarians of all stripes to actually organize in a manner for our own individual survival for such a situation. It seems everyone thinks their own vision of what is to come will work and the others are automatically failures. That kind of thinking must end now if we're to survival the inevitible power grab/breakdown. In the end, we shouldn't be fighting over who's vision of tommorrow is the best, rather we need to be fighting for our own survival and for those whom we value in our lives. Otherwise, what we believe in is worthless.
"The power of liberty going forward is in decentralization. Not in leaders, but in decentralized activism. In a market process." -- liberty student
Here is the actual interview that various sources in the above quote from, where Panarin goes into more detail regarding his theory:[from: http://www.russiatoday.com/features/news/33836 ]
Question: Mr. Panarin, where did this idea of the breakup of the US come from back in 1998, when this country was prospering and when it was an unconditional world leader? Answer: In September 1998 an international conference called the Informational War was held in Austria. I presented my analytical research there. 150 out of 400 participants were from the USA. There was outrageous shouting in the audience when I was talking about the division of America in my presentation. However my reasons were well-grounded. Back then it was obvious that finance and economy would be the main destructive power for the USA. The dollar was not secured by anything. The external debt of the country was growing like an avalanche in spite of the fact that it was non-existent at the beginning of the 1980s. In 1998, when I was making my forecast, it had reached 2 trillion dollars. Today it’s more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid which is bound to collapse. Q: Will the entire American economy collapse? A: It is collapsing now. Three out of the five largest and oldest banks on Wall Street ceased to exist because of the financial crisis; and the other two are on the verge of surviving. Their losses are the largest in history. Now we are talking about replacing the regulation system in the world: America will no longer be the world regulator. Q: Which country will replace it? A: Two countries are making a claim for this role: China with its large reserves, and Russia as a country which could play the role of a regulator on the Eurasian territory. A rather remarkable event took place at the G20 summit which has just taken place in Washington. Participants put forward the new architectonics of the international affairs where a key role would belong to the International Monetary Fund. But the International Monetary Fund needs funds. Thus the participants addressed China and Japan with a request to provide money. The gold reserves of China come to more than 2 trillion dollars. It is the largest creditor to the USA. Now it will definitely affect the policy of the fund. By the way, it is not accidental that Mr. Hu Jintao met two leaders at the summit: the Russian President and the leader of the UK. There are plans to hold the spring G20 meeting in England. And the meeting with Russia as a country which is putting forward the basic principles of reconstructing the world financial system also clearly fits the vision of the Chinese reformation process. “Skeleton which keeps the USA together is fragile” Q: We are clear about the world leaders. But let’s go back to the USA. What makes you believe in the possible division of the country? A: There are a number of reasons. First, the financial problems of the USA will increase. Millions of citizens have already lost their savings. Prices and unemployment keep growing. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse which means that entire towns will end up unemployed. The governors are now harshly demanding money from the federal center. Complaints are growing. They’ve been restrained so far by the presidential election and by hope that Obama could perform a miracle. However, by spring it will become clear that a miracle will not happen. The second factor is the vulnerability of the political mechanism in the USA. There is no uniform legislation on the territory of the country. There aren’t even general uniform traffic rules. The skeleton which keeps the USA together is fragile. Even the armed forces in Iraq are represented by the non-citizens of the United States to a large extent. They fight for the promise of American citizenship. Thus the army, as a melting pot has stopped fulfilling a consolidating function for the American state. And finally, the split of the elite has made itself especially clear under the conditions of the crisis. “Hundred dollar notes may get frozen” Q: How will the country be divided? Mexico is obviously in the south. What else? A: There are six parts altogether. The first one is the Pacific Ocean coast of the USA. I can give you an example: 53% of San Francisco’s population is Chinese. The Governor of Washington state was an ethnic Chinese; its capital, Seattle, is called the gate of the Chinese emigration to the USA. It is obvious that the Pacific Ocean coast has been gradually influenced by China. The second part in the south is definitely the Mexicans. In some areas, Spanish has become the official language already. Then comes Texas which has been openly fighting for independence. The Atlantic coast has a totally different ethnos and mentality. It could be split into two parts as well. And we are left with two central depressive areas. May I remind you that five central states where the Indians live had announced their independence. It was perceived as a joke or a kind of a political show. But the fact remains the same. Canada is making a strong influence in the North. By the way, Russia may require returning Alaska, as it had been rented out… Q: What will happen to the dollar then? A: In 2006 a secret agreement was made between Canada, Mexico and the USA on preparing to implement the Amero as a new currency unit. This may mean replacement of the dollar. At the same time 100-dollar notes which have flooded the world may just get “frozen”. An excuse may be used, for example, that terrorists have made false notes which need to be checked. "Confrontation between the clans has become open” Q: Could you tell us about the division of the elite. Are these the democrats and the republicans? A: No, that is not right. There are two groups in the US authorities. The first one may be called the globalists, or the Trotskyites. Leon Trotsky had already formulated their idea in the past: it’s not Russia that we need, but a world revolution. Soviet Russia was viewed by them as a base for control over the world. The second group is the statists which want prosperity for their country. Representatives of these two clans are present in both Democratic and Republican Parties. Take voting for the anti-crisis plan of Paulson, which was suggested by the Republican administration, for example. It was voted down in the Congress by the Republicans first of all. Q: Who is in charge of the clans? A: The key persons of the globalists are Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney. The key persons of the statists are Robert Gates, Defense Secretary; Michael Hayden, CIA Director; and Admiral Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence. Globalists are mainly the financial elite, and statists are the armed forces, special services and military and industrial complex. Recently the confrontation between these two clans has become open. In December last year the statists presented a report which completely denied the existence of the nuclear program in Iran. It directly contradicted conclusions made by Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney. The second important event took place at the hearings of the US Congress concerning the 5-day war in the Caucasus. The globalists represented by Condoleezza Rice insisted that Russia had started the war and that it would be punished for it. Georgia was the project of Condoleezza. And representatives of the intelligence community presented a diametrically opposite statement: that Georgia had started the war. We see an open confrontation between very outstanding political figures. Q: And who’s Obama’s company? A: The statists with Gates in charge were the key players who had enabled Obama to win. They are demanding that he change the general line in return. In this light, a very interesting factor is that Gates the Republican is viewed as the most important candidate as to whether he remains the US Defense Secretary or becomes the Secretary of State. This is the influence of the statists on the President. By the way, the first session which Obama held was with the American intelligence community. “We have to cut the ropes tying us to Titanic.” Q: What does the victory of the statists mean for Russia? A: It’s a rather good chance for us, as they acted on our side in the conflict in the Caucasus. According to President Medvedev’s visit to the USA we see that he was not subject to any obstruction in relation to the events in the Caucasus. The atmosphere in Washington was rather calm and friendly. Q: What should Russia do in order to avoid shocks in relation to a possible economic collapse of the United States? A: It should develop the rouble as the regional currency. It should form an efficient petroleum exchange which would sell oil for roubles. Several days ago an agreement was signed between Russia and Belarus on transferring payments for oil and gas to roubles. This is the beginning of establishing the ruble as the regional currency as well. We’ve been receiving our currency from Kazakhstan and Belarus for electricity already. Now our task is to try to make as many rouble contracts as possible for the year 2009 before the end of this year. In this case Russia will be able to escape the growing global crisis. We have to cut the ropes tying us to the financial “Titanic” which, in my opinion, will drown in the nearest future.
ladyattis: Otherwise, what we believe in is worthless.
Otherwise, what we believe in is worthless.
Nitroadict:Aside from surviving the oncoming onslaught, I take it from your paragraph, yes? I more or less agree.
I think we'll survive it. I hate to sound crazier than the economist, but I sorta 'see' it as a pattern of events. It's one thing about me that I've tried to understand in as much as why I'm able to simulate (in my head) with relative accuracy from current events the most likely future events. All I can honestly say right now from what I see in the possible pattern of events is that we're approaching a point in these events where there will be no return, it'll be do or die. And for us in particular, we better do, because for me dying is no option.
ladyattis: Nitroadict:Aside from surviving the oncoming onslaught, I take it from your paragraph, yes? I more or less agree. I think we'll survive it. I hate to sound crazier than the economist, but I sorta 'see' it as a pattern of events. It's one thing about me that I've tried to understand in as much as why I'm able to simulate (in my head) with relative accuracy from current events the most likely future events. All I can honestly say right now from what I see in the possible pattern of events is that we're approaching a point in these events where there will be no return, it'll be do or die. And for us in particular, we better do, because for me dying is no option.
I agree again in the sense that at some point, it won't be about hypotheticals & forum arguments / debates, although even when the time for reaction to circumstances comes in the form 'the real thing', those certainly would still go on in some form online. Do you think the FSP is a positive thing, taking the possible series of events that are about to occur? Or should there be more than one FSP in various states that achieve more than the token sub-100 people involved?
I think the FSP is a good idea in the long term if you're looking to influence local governance to your point of view. As for making other FSP-like missions in other states, I'm not sure, I think it should be a case-by-case basis for it because some states like Texas and California are often largely dependent on the Federal grants they take in to cover the gap in funding that federal taxes produce (feds get first dibs, then the states). So, I would strongly argue against trying such ventures in California or Texas. Then you have a state like Florida where a large immigrant (US citizens from larger states) influx in which the average immigrant came from states where the government was far larger than what Florida had/has, so again like Texas and California, it would be a no go for an FSP-like mission.
Oddly, I think the agricultural states like Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas have a similar chance of success like New Hampshire under an FSP-like mission because there's enough people to keep them populated, but small enough over all to hold sway in the local governments (especially the state government). And right now, many people in these states feel silenced by the Obama win (if you've looked at the voter ratios in those states, you'll find they clearly had a large population that felt McCain was a traditional conservative (enough) to favor him...reaching out these folks would be the best means to get them to agree to the reality that their destinies are their own and not DCs.