Silent country now
Will these stones not cry out still
If it remain so?
We must think our time has comeBut you and I do not existPersons neither, anyoneWho matters now could just have missedPlaces overlooked becauseThey exist without a causeCensored yes, and here's the twist--without a name, bereft of laws;Censors used to keep the rollof citizens, and so you knowMotivation, and the goalIs to erase us all, althoughWe are now invisible--What we are, illegible;'See no evil', must we showWhat lies behind the curtain-pull?Greatest rings of power grantThe power we have won for freeUs! To whom the babbled cantMust move like waves upon the sea!Walking free beneath the sunJust before the battle-drum--Yes, indeed-- and can it bethat we must think our time has come?
How America Balkanized
by Albert Warwick
I have often been asked to give an account for the "balkanization" of the United States of America. Needless to say, there was an essay written, now lost, which was very infamous and drew a great deal of unwanted attention to me. In it, I had carefully sourced both historical texts and current events to try to give a precise account of those fatal decades. It was too early! I regret now that I published it, being naive as I was in those days, because the ensuing complications deprived me of much of my prior work, being seized by the authorities of the WSU, which included both the work in question and my notes.
But for the sake of my readers, and at the behest of Mr. Salazar, I have endeavored to recreate as much of the substance of the argument as possible here. If not for your gracious donations and his organization, there might not have been Yet Another Warwick Essay ever again!
The United States counts its founding day as July 4th, 1776. Although at the time the founders of the former nation considered themselves burdened by an oppressive king, they were in fact, as some contrasting accounts show more factually, burdened by a neglectful and capricious Parliament. That British Parliament would be responsible for, in its capricious disdain for commitment, the loss of nearly all of Britain's colonies, despite the best efforts of its kings.
While the principle of federalism, itself a very English idea, was in theory deeply ensconced in this nation's Constitution, it is arguable that it is this very principle that was its undoing. J. Rosenberg did some interesting work, which I once had access to, about the origins of Federalism in the history of the English Speaking Peoples. In his work, "The Seed Which Spread Itself", he argued rather conclusively that English history was marked by an inability to retain centralization, simply because the respect for 'the particular' always prevented any traditionally minded, typically 'authoritarian' figure from behaving in a centralizing fashion.
His notes on the rise of certain occult movements at particular times aside (I think the historical patterns suggest these are epiphenomena rather than causes, as he seems determined to prove) it's very clear that almost every unification of English speakers or their protectorates (sometimes only marginally speakers of English) is invoked on the principle of protecting "Ancient Liberties", these liberties themselves inscribing notions of what later became 'federalism'.
At various times, this idea took different casts, sometimes it was the Common Law, other times it was the 'rights' in the Domesday Book, and we are given to believe even in English pre-history it has its exemplars.
As a law therefore, the more Authority a figure attained within the English speaking milieu, the more they were compelled into a contradictory relationship with the very power that Authority entailed. At first this always expressed itself as a deference to present governing authorities, which were a multiciplity but none of which had for themselves the Right that they arrogated.
Later however, as those authorities themselves, being of an illegitimate and underhanded sort (we can see this pattern also in the Parliament re-making the royal seal on its own when the King removed it) became unable to successfully retain unification. The figure that follows their indecision typically stands in resistance to them, but is unable to, because of the contradiction aforementioned, do anything but be the cause of the shattering of the prior union.
This process has several phases, and one of them often sets itself in contradistinction as a phase of intense unification. The second is like it, but elite in nature rather than popular, and sets the stage for the collection of the illegitmate 'unifying' authorities that the final figure comes to fight against.
Because there are always several visions of unity, especially with the concept of "federalism", there come to be two distinct parties both of which have a different idea of unity. It turns out that, however, even in their victory, the unifying party always causes the failure of the Union.
The reason is simple: the authorities that they have to break to win are what are holding the Union together, and by defeating them, they necessarily release their essentially social bond with the protectorates. The battles that follow are only half-hearted, because the state has had to remove half of its heart.
In the history of the United States the process was rather similar. It is said that the average life expectancy (being about 70 years consistently throughout its history) combined with political cycles (2 and 6 years for various congressional positions, 4 years for Presidents) created a 75 year 'turn' in US government. This 'turn' cannot be overstated; each turn created a new government, it was a revolution. In the history of English 'Glorious Revolutions', they were sometimes mostly bloodless.
As would happen, the United States was due for its next turn around 2007 Anno Domini (37 UE) but this turn failed to happen. This does not mean that the old government would last forever, since the decay of old governments was rather regular and was the central 'cause' of turns.
This is where things get interesting, and in all likelihood, the following claims were what got me in the most trouble with the Western States Union authority. Naturally, revealing what became quickly and retroactively regarded as state secrets while still residing in said state was a foolish oversight on my part.
Nevertheless, it really started in or about mid-July in 2020