The American Balkanization Masterpost


LARPers gonna LARP, and the question of secession/balkanization/skyrim is indisputably my favorite topic to LARP about. This is something I have opined on before in my “Partition of the United States” series (1, 2, 3, 4), and I’m going to recycle since I still agree with most of what I’ve written. But I enjoy writing and wanted to put together something new-ish on the topic, and contained within a single post, which would be much easier to link people to going forward. I also recommend reading American Nations, Albion’s Seed, and Tocqueville’s Democracy in America (not that he supports my conclusions, but that it’s worthwhile reading for anyone who is interested in the trajectory and history and of the United States and its racial groups). So without further ado, I present The American Balkanization Masterpost.

Why Balkanization?

US vs AHDo these look like states destined to endure?

I hesitate to call it inevitable, but when you take a historical perspective of things, it seems improbable that our multi-ethnic country will endure, and probable that it will break along lines of tribal identity. The United States—as a transcontinental and contiguous state encompassing multitudes of people, having sizable and distinct ethnic and/or racial groups, possessing a large and powerful military, being governed by a strong centralized bureaucracy and maintaining a hegemonic position over other states—is an empire, And as an empire, it will fall. The United States has become the Austria-Hungary of the  21st century, a polyglot empire of diverse populations that do not see eye to eye politically, socially, culturally, etc. I believe that a partition of the United States, while not inevitable, is not only a likely outcome but a beneficial outcome. Much of the political gridlock and cultural conflict in this country is derived from ethnic differences and divergent ideologies. Whether it’s social policies, media representation, interactions with the police, ideas about government or any number of contemporary issues, they are all rooted in race/ethnicity in some way, shape or form. Identity is political. Additionally, these differences often overlap with geographic regions, resulting in a conflict between essentially the Northeast and the South to convince the rest of the country to side with them by a slim margin in order to control the government. Kind of ridiculous. But distinctly imperial.

The division—or collapse—of the United States into several successor republics along nationalist principles would help solve this issue. What better way for oppressed peoples to escape their oppressors than independence? Nationalism would also kill racial politics and allow us to move left or right as we please without having to deal with kingmaker ethnic blocs, like for example Republicans and Democrats desperately trying to win “the Latino vote.” That constituency votes with the left, the party concerned with seizure of the other’s assets.

Not all of the states created through partition need be nationalist—creating viable nation states out of some regions of the United States is literally impossible. Some regions also lack, in my opinion, the metapolitical potential to do so—I can’t see (implicitly) right-wing White nationalists taking over the Pacific Northwest despite it having a White majority. But generally, I believe that states with large ethnic majorities (~80%) are possible, especially in the the US interior and the Southwest. Other areas are more mixed and politically divided and should be their own countries, run as ideological successor states to the Union with full embrace of multiculturalism and “equal rights,” rather than being assigned to a nation-state.

It should be noted though, that for the purposes of this thought exercise, I am assuming a partition that involves minimal violence and ethnic cleansing, both of which have a tendency to happen, e.g. breakup of Yugoslavia, partition of Indian and Pakistan, etc. There is no way to really account for this; similarly I cannot be certain which populations would voluntarily relocate themselves, e.g. Soviet/Russian Jews moving to Israel and the United States after the fall of the USSR. Just as people have immigrated to certain regions, they can emigrate from them.

Although the US could collapse under any number of scenarios, I am running with the idea that increased internal instability leads to a series of crises that break the back of the federal government and that in turn leads to former-SSR style secession movements dissolving the Union in a largely peaceful way. There is zero guarantee that this will be the case, however. Perhaps those Franks who do the jobs Romans won’t do will be the catalysts. Or maybe, rebellions will rise against the anti-white regime in Washington. Who really knows in 2015.

Potential Successor States & Former American Republics

I have produced a map of how balkanization might play out. The names of each country are pretty arbitrary, and in some sense so are their borders. I think the general territory and area of control of each state seems fairly accurate, though at the level of counties I am probably off. I don’t necessarily endorse each of these as coming into existence or their potential borders, but rather suspect them to be the most likely outcomes; and by likely I mean possible. Canada is also included because developments in the US would surely affect the Great White North. Also I suspect most governments will be modeled after the old US—hence Republic—but there’s no guarantee of that either. Maybe we’ll get a traditionalist Protestant United Kingdom of the Upper South & Appalachia and an American Socialist Republic of New England.


Going clockwise-ish:

  • United States of the Atlantic — Far-left and multiculturalist state that preserves the identity and ideology of the northeastern United States and parts of the old Northwest, and rules over that area. It may include the District of Columbia, but common sense would suggest moving the capital back up to New York, the natural capital of the United States, which was only changed in the first place due to compromise with Southerners. Many of those areas I have assigned are Anglo-American but happen to be blue states. That may not be the case in the future given the growing racialization of US politics. They could very well develop a deeper racial-political consciousness and reject liberalism and embrace White identity politics. In any event, I am sure there would be ethnic and racial tensions between the Whiter-but-still-liberal suburban/countryside regions of the US-Atlantic and the more vibrant and culturally enriched urban conglomerations like New York and Boston. Diversity + proximity = conflict.
  • Anglo-American Republic — White nationalist state including the Midwest, Appalachia, the Upper South and the northern counties of Deep Southern states, and therefore much of the interior of the United States.This state has the weirdest borders and I am the least certain of what they would ultimately end up as, or if such a state would hold together. There could actually be several White nationalist successor states, just as there are several multicultural ones, as White Americans are the largest ancestry group in the United States.
  • African American Republic — Black nationalist state comprising much of the lower South, especially the southern portions of many states. Arguably the Deep South in particular is the homeland of African Americans as a people, given that half of them live there and it is where most blacks in the rest of United States trace their ancestry to due to migration. Their ethnogenesis is certainly rooted in slavery and the South maintained that institution for the longest.
  • Floridian Republic — Multiculturalist state consisting of Florida and several counties outside of current Florida’s borders. Possibly includes Puerto Rico, reflecting the Spanish Caribbean orientation of [at least southern] Florida. Other US territory in the Caribbean should also go to this country, e.g. US Virgin Islands, Guantanamo Bay, etc.
  • Greater Texas — Mostly White and conservative Hispanic state including most of current Texas, Oklahoma, and the western half of Louisiana.
  • State of Aztlan — Leftist Hispanic/Latino nation state incorporating most of the original Mexican Cession, particularly Southern California, Arizona, New Mexico, and a slice of western Texas. These areas have flipped to a near or majority Latino population in recent years due to immigration. The Rio Grande is our Rhine and we have lost it.
  • Democratic Republic of Cascadia — Far-left and multiculturalist state comprising Washington, Oregon, Northern California, and nearby counties. Technically it will be a White-majority country for some time, but the cultural values of the Pacific Northwest are not conducive to ethnic nationalism, and it would probably accept immigrants more generously than even the current USA. One possible outcome is a mostly White country ruled by an Anglo-Asian-Jewish bureaucracy.
  • Other Provinces  — States like Alaska and Hawaii are so far from the American homeland that tethering them to us any longer would go against the principles of separatism and nationalism along regional lines. Perhaps Hawaii and Alaska will have some sort of relationship with Cascadia, as it would be the nearest US successor, or become independent. Hawaii might go to Australia, along with many of the US Pacific Islands as civic nations in the Anglosphere. Guam and American Samoa too would also meet some indeterminate fate regarding sovereignty.
  • Canada — America’s hat won’t just sit there while we balkanize:
    1. Whatever they may be, the forces that would hypothetically disintegrate the United States would also impact Canada in some way. If not, the disintegration of the US itself would impact Canada.
    2. The emergence of an Anglo-American Republic would certainly influence the political and cultural dialogue in Canada. The same goes for an actual Cascadian independence scenario.
    3. Nationally conscious anglophone White majority provinces in Canada would want to join a Anglo-American Republic while the Quebecois and First Nations would not.
    4. If anglophone White Canada west of Quebec joins Anglo-America, it would have a land route to Alaska, which would otherwise be virtually inaccessible as it lacks Pacific ports in my scenario. Alaska could then join Anglo-America rather than becoming independent.
    5. Cascadia would gain most of British Columbia and unite the Pacific Northwest region. The United States of the Atlantic gets Toronto and neighboring areas of Canada that aren’t Francophone or ripe for White nationalism. Vancouver becomes a Chinese city-state for shits and giggles.

Nationalist Countries/Ethnostates vs Multicultural States in a Balkanized America

I envision partition or balkanization, ideally, as a division of the United States into nation states and multicultural/multi-ethnic states. Diverse parts of the the United States would simply become diverse countries. This is the most peaceful method of carving up the United States and would require the least amount of force and deportation.

The “multiculturalist” states will echo the America we are all familiar with and which many of us have come to resent: the America of affirmative action, white privilege, non-white immigration, political gridlock, jewish lobbyists, rent-seeking, and so forth. These successor republics are welcome to continue their social experiment and see where it leads them. I’m sure they’ll do really well since discrimination is economically harmful and all people are capable of being equal consumers if that’s all you care about in your national ideology. In the event that they do poorly, the multicultural states will be a solid source of immigrants for the nationalist states, which will, of course, restrict immigration based on blood and ancestry.

The nationalist states will take a different approach. These countries will have large ethnic majorities, which are legally favored in state ideology and policy, which is the inverse of the multiculturalist states. Nativism and pro-natalist policies will be enacted, border patrols will be created, and there may be a tendency toward autarky. This would be economically inefficient, but the modus operandi of nationalism is not profit maximization but ethnic preservation and growth. Should conditions deteriorate enough to drive emigration, the governments will have to allow those who want out to leave, which is incidentally a way of solving the pluralism question. In turn, nationalist states will be a source of immigrants for multicultural states.

Ethnic minorities will inevitably exist in nationalist countries, having ended up on the wrong side of the partition through no fault of their own, as it is difficult to draw ethnically conscious and concise borders. While their rights will hopefully not be molested, they cannot expect any further rights, privileges, guarantees, or preferences that they would under their own nation states, or the multiculturalist states. Self-deportation and emigration ought to be encouraged through financial incentives that could perhaps be covered by a fund set up as one of the last acts of the unitary United States government or through legalism.

The nationalist countries could make up their losses from emigration through immigration of their ethnic kin. For example, millions of Anglo-Americans will be left outside the borders of an Anglo-American state. While some of them will chose to stay “abroad” for whatever reasons they may have, some will ultimately move. White flight already exists internally and if the contemporary White flight phenomenon is any indicator of privately-held racial attitudes of Whites, they probably will move. In the short term, partition might create housing shortages or surpluses in some parts of the old United States, but this will work itself out. The free market will literally fix it. People need homes and people need jobs; boom, you have a construction industry. Government intervention may be likely to assist home-buyers and renters, and as home ownership is a prerequisite for having a higher standard of living, and a higher standard of living promotes better education, which improves many aspects of our lives; nationalist countries ought to do this for the benefit of their own people. Generous social policies are, of course, more common in homogeneous societies since you are basically taxed to help your extended family. Diverse societies, on the other hand, are low-trust and require an excessive amount of resources devoted to stability and security relative to more homogeneous societies. Naturally then, nationalist countries would have to “discriminate,” which would be another push factor for minorities to emigrate and go to their own nation state or one of the multicultural states.

Growth is not necessarily going to be central to nationalists as it is to capitalists/multiculturalists. Sustainable populations are much more important. Nobody rightfully would want to create a “white Africa” with birthrates double or triple of 2.1—that would promote societal decay and degeneracy, i.e. dysgenics, poverty, sexual crime and abuse, unrest, etc. What is important is to both invest in White human capital and also secure a homeland to promote human flourishing. 14 maybe 88.

Other Ethnic Groups and Logistic Concerns

Notably, Asians, Jews, and indigenes/American Indians, the next largest ethnic groups in the United States, do not end up with their own states in this partition/collapse scheme, and I wanted to address that. This is because they do not constitute a large enough geographic majority in any region of the country. With regards to their prospects, I imagine Asians—particularly East Asians—would be tolerated in most of the successor republics. Asians, particularly women, are as equally likely to marry non-Asians as Asians, which is a stark contrast compared to every other racial group in the United States. As an identity, Asian American cannot survive with that degree of outbreeding. Many Asian women marry and have children with White men, and many White men who opt for Asian women are racially conscious insofar as they are aware of racial differences, but not White nationalists. White-Asian couples are also wealthier than White-White or Asian-Asian couples according to statistics, and so financial incentives may lead to “honorary White” status of Asian spouses in the Anglo-American Republic, just as Asians in segregated South Africa were granted such privileges. This won’t come unanimously but as compromise, and the winning argument would likely insist that there is very little to gain from turning them away and that their descendants will be less and less Asian each generation. As there already is a lot of White-Asian racemixing and Whites hugely outnumber Asians in the United States, this can only end with the extinction of the latter. There will also be the inevitable specter of the “it could be worse argument,” which would cite other possible hybrids as being a greater racial threat. I do not necessarily endorse this outcome, but see it as plausible. Simply visit any urban area with enough Whites and Asians and you will see the next generation in the works. But logically speaking in terms of the partition scheme I have speculated, Asians and mixed-Asians, or any mixed people, would naturally be at home in the multicultural successor states. Thus I see the Asian minority and WMAF as a self-correcting phenomena in the event that White nationalism emerges.

Jews will likely concentrate in the multicultural states, since economic prospects for them will be poor in the African American Republic, many in the Anglo-American Republic will be hostile to them due to the longstanding overlap between the JQ and WN, and the overt Catholicism of the State of Aztlan will be off-putting. Then again, the partition of the United States will probably be a push factor for many anglophone American jews to emigrate from the old US and go to Israel/Canada/Australia/Britain. Soviet jews left en masse when their host fell apart. Jewish identity in the contemporary United States is weakening though, as jews marry goyim at very high rates and their offspring are usually not raised religiously. Jewish influence however, will likely maintain itself for years to come, because of their disproportionate representation in media and academia (especially Ivy League colleges), in addition to higher income rate than any other group in the United States and strong ethnocentrism even among half-breeds. Ironically, as the tribe grows smaller, its per capita wealth may grow larger—less descendants competing for the same amount of money. But if partition does happen in the near-distant future, it will be a numbers game, and population will be chief among those numbers. Less jews will ultimately mean less influence on the outcome of the successor states, certainly less influence than blacks or Hispanics. The only area where jewish individuals (much less so communities given their dwindling trajectories) will have substantial wealth or influence will probably be the United States of the Atlantic, as it contains New York, home to the largest non-Israeli urban population of jewish people. The Floridian Republic may also be a center of jewish influence, life and culture given the fact that so many ((((New Yorkers)))) migrate there.

With the partition of the United States, all tribal treaties and reservations essentially become void. Any individuals with at least two American Indian grandparents and who live on tribal lands should be granted some sort of autonomy or freedom of movement status, while those who do not meet those criteria may still be identified as indigenous descent but will not be granted such privileges. There is really no viable state that can easily be created for them, other than in perhaps Alaska or from counties in the Dakotas. The latter is especially unlikely given that the Dakotas as a whole are hugely White-majority and possess abundant natural resources that a White majority should not want to give up. Likely outcome: American Indians migrate to the multicultural states.

Hispanic Whites are another big question group. People who “originate” from the Spanish-speaking countries of the Americas come in a variety of phenotypes and are difficult to classify in many cases. But often they are really not that difficult to classify at all. If someone looks White and happens to have a Spanish name, they are probably mostly, if not wholly, of Iberian Spanish descent, and as is typically agreed by White nationalists, all indigenous gentile European groups are White. Are Hispanics with a few drops of Aztec blood any less white than Appalachian Scotch-Irish with a few drops of American Indian? Not really, so long as they match one of the many White phenotypes that exist and have assimilated into Anglo-American society. Now, obviously, there are Hispanics who are very clearly non-white. Minimally small numbers of those who are assimilated into Anglo culture have a shot at integration into a White ethnostate, but most would ultimately be better off in one of the multicultural states.

Another concern is over what will become of the federal government’s assets and debt. Military hardware and nuclear weaponry could be proportionately divided, although I would personally prefer the bulk of the stockpile goes to the White ethnostate. Bases overseas would be closed and their equipment repatriated or sold off to foreign countries. China is the biggest holder of debt, which could prove problematic. One solution is to sell territory to the Chinese, who will probably buy it, given their ridiculous lust for non-contiguous territory. No Caribbean holdings should be given to a non-hemispheric state as they would become someone else’s bases; however, Pacific islands are another story. The United States has a lot of irrelevant territory and vassals in that ocean which could be sold off to the Chinese. There will be little support for this among the population of these islands, but they had no say in their annexation to the United States in the first place. The United States could also forgive whatever Chinese debt it currently holds, rather than divide it among the successor states.

Secession and Reconquista

It may be reasonably argued that the whole of the United States, or indeed Canada, is the patrimony of Anglo-America and of the White race in North America, or something to that effect; that the land of our fathers which was won by their fathers before is rightfully ours to be inherited and passed from one generation to the next. But while this nationalist metaphysics works well enough for establishing one’s legitimacy and inspiring pride and identity in a people and their soil, it neglects the reality that a people must be vigilant in defense of their land, commons and civilization itself. The fact of the matter is that we have failed to do so and thus have gravely jeopardized this patrimony. The next generation of Americans will have no racial majority. The American empire is being overtaken by outgroups and we no longer have the will to maintain our authority over it along ethnocentric lines or even to maintain ourselves as the majority. Our elites hire foreign mercenaries to staff even the most basic jobs in our society while our own fertility and cultural expression is suppressed.

Within this context, for some it is dishonorable and rage-inducing to think we may have to cede swathes of this country to other tribes when it has been ours for centuries. Additionally insulting is that we haven’t even lost it through war; did the rest of the world invade the United States and impose settlement in our cities? No, they were let in. But much like the sprinkling of Muslim populations across the Balkans is a legacy of the Ottoman empire, it would seem as if a ((((foreign conqueror)))) had ruled and colonized the Anglo-American empire at some point. How else did all these foreign enclaves get here? Globalization has been a demographic disaster. 1965 was a disaster. There is thus a bitter taste to the very idea of secession from what was once almost entirely ours, a gut reaction that it is injustice.

In my writings on partition and secession I try to balance my LARPy visions with what I honestly find to be the most plausible. And I think our multi-ethnic empire cannot survive and that identity-based secessionism will be what succeeds it in the event of  a government collapse, either from a loss of will, ability to project power and enforce authority, etc. It would be short-sighted to imagine that a White ethnostate will be the perpetual end product of such collapse, however. For those who believe in an Anglo-American right to North America as imperium there is perhaps a silver lining. Similar things have happened in the past. In particular, I look to the Spanish Reconquista for inspiration as to how the distant future may unfold.

In the early eighth century, Visigothic Spain—which had succeeded Rome as the indigenous European power in Iberia—was conquered by the invading “Moors,” an amalgamation of Muslim Arabs and Berbers from North Africa. Well, most of it. Beyond the mountains of northern Spain, a small European principality—the Kingdom of Asturias—emerged under the banner of Pelagius, whose army defeated the Umayyads in a skirmish. The Visigoths/Hispano-Romans had lost control of their country and retrenched into a toehold of Iberia, a White enclave surrounded by hostile occupiers.

2000px-Flag_of_Asturias_(indoor).svgThe flag of Asturias

But it wasn’t Asturias that reconquered Iberia, and Asturias wasn’t the end of white Europeans in Iberia. The Whites who retook the peninsula came not as Visigoths or Hispano-Romans. They were Castilians, Catalans, Leonese, Galicians, Portuguese—Spaniards. The Reconquista was a seven hundred year process. Similarly, I think our race will survive in this continent through the existence of an Anglo-American ethnostate, even if it would be a vestigial remnant of the United States. And should our successors wage their own Reconquista, they will likely not go as we are now. Their customs, manners and languages can and will shift in ways we cannot control, but history has vindicated many such transformations—it wasn’t the Visigoths with their Roman serfs that mustered enough strength to destroy Islam in Iberia and drive it back into Africa, it was Spain. As Whites currently stand in the United States, I see no immediate evidence that we have the culture and customs needed to revitalize at a high enough level. We will have to stop being Romans and start being Spaniards.

So to those looking at secession as surrender, I don’t think it’s that clear cut. The loss of territory also allows for a much needed retrenchment and rebuilding of national and racial solidarity. That in turn enables a Reconquista, something we are unable to mobilize for in our current state of decline and decadence. An Anglo-American state could be our Asturias. Mind you, that is perhaps a dire case scenario. The White ethnostate that succeeds the American empire could just as well be more analogous to the independence of Turkey from the Ottoman empire—a regional power rather than a rump state. We have the numbers and contiguous territory to pull that off and our descendants would still be in a position to launch a hypothetical reconquest. Ultimately two things are certain: that we cannot know the future with certainty and that it will not happen overnight.

the_reconquista__ad_722___1492__by_undevicesimus-d630pf7The Reconquista (AD 722 – 1492) by Undevicesimus


A partition of the United States along nationalist principles would be beneficial to both muliticulturalists and nationalists, alleviate political gridlock, eliminate most racial conflict within each region, and allow each nation of the United States to prosper or perish on its own terms. Whites in particular would be better off with a smaller ethnostate that would allow for a cultural and moral reorientation towards ingroup loyalty and survivalism rather than universalism and decadence. The transition from a White nationalist metapolitics to a White nationalist state anywhere in North America of any size would be more significant than any event in our postwar history. It would be a temporal loss but a spiritual rejuvenation, the reclamation of our own selves for ourselves. We have retreated before and have always come out stronger.

See Also

Atlantic Centurion:

  1. Is America the Next Roman Empire?
  2. The original partition series
  3. Racism vs. Nationalism in the United States
  4. “White Supremacy,” Self-Determination and Human Rights

The Right Stuff:

  1. Analyzing Skyrim
  2. Secession and Skyrim
  3. Whither Skyrim?
  4. Anglo-Americanism
  5. Identity Politics Destroyed Austria-Hungary


  1. The Future of the West: White Revolution, Brazilification, or Argentinization?
This entry was posted in America, Ideology and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to The American Balkanization Masterpost

  1. Stirner (@heresiologist) says:

    The border of Anglo-America should probably extend north through rural Maryland, Western/Central PA, and the Western part of NY State. Appalachia extends all the way up to the St. Lawrence, when you start looking at rural small towns in that swath of the NE. Lots of fracking potential to be exploited as well.

    Strategically, Anglo-America should hold onto Louisiana to insure that they have a port on the Gulf, and dominance over the Mississippi.

    Just quibbles though, the map is well thought out.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Drogger says:

    Good LARP, AC.

    Hard to disagree with the lot of it. Liberalism will destroy itself in the long run, that is guaranteed. Perhaps a white ethno-state would be persona non grata in the future, but if turtles up for the long haul the fruit will be ripe for the reconquista picking.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Dingus Rattenberg says:

    This is good stuff. I enjoy your work at TRS and I’m glad I found this. This post may be larping, but only just barely. There are a couple of shorter-term strategic things that we need to think about if the United States is, indeed, to balkanize.

    1.) Courting aid from temporary strategic allies such as Russia and China. To the extent that these nations have an incentive to undermine the stability of the United States, it should be exploited. I remember that there were some rumors swirling a while back about Putin supporting Texas secessionism. I don’t know about China, but I have to imagine that if things ever get truly tense re: Taiwan, Japan, and the String of Pearls, there could be an angle to work with the Chinese as well.

    2.) Cost of governance. When it comes to “saving the United States,” I tend to disagree with the “worse is better crowd.” But if we want to break up the United States into ethnic factions, worse is definitely better. Right now, the US has staying power because its legitimacy is generally unchallenged by the vast majority of its citizens, and because it can buy off disaffected individuals and groups with heaps of gibsmedat. The Federal Government maintains legitimacy through propaganda and direct subsidy–we need to find ways to increase the burden/institutional strain on both fronts.

    3.) Parallel institutions. As the US Gov. becomes increasingly expensive and unresponsive, we will need to lay the groundwork for alternative sources of sovereignty. The Anglo-American republic appears to be an enormous and sparsely-populated territory. It will need active paramilitary institutions. It will need networks to move information across thousands of miles quickly and reliably. As an ethnostate, many of its vital functions will probably emerge organically, but there will probably need to be some kind of quasi-government ready to step in once the shit hits the fan.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 1.) It’s worth remembering that foreign aid from non-western countries is entirely self-serving. There won’t be any free gibs like we do with the third world; China/Russia will want things that we might not.
      2.) Malicious compliance is always a good tactic against a system you want to erode figuratively and literally
      3.) Yeah government and society will not be very centralized in the aftermath of a collapse. Technology and secure communications will play a vital role.


      • Dingus Rattenberg says:

        I agree with you in substance on point one. I also think that in order to take down Hegemon A, we may need to bandwagon with contender C and contender R to get it done. I am uneasy about it, but I think the option has to be on the table and out in the open. Plus, C&R might just decide that destabilizing their biggest rival is an end in itself, as France did when it allied with the American revolutionaries against the British Empire (If, in the present scenario, we had to sweeten the pot by helping them colonize Aztlan in the process, it wouldn’t be the end of the world).


  4. Ron says:

    New Hampshire and Maine will never go along with the Atlantic states.


  5. Tom says:

    Good thinking but a few issues:

    1. The multiculturalist White states, of which there are a redundant two, own much of some of the most valuable coastlines on the planet. These coastlines are a huge military, political, and economic advantage. I see no reason to have the Left control these coastlines while we are relegated to a small portion of Atlantic coastline in the South. The White Left are a minority and should be treated as such. They should adapt to us, not we to them. More on this later.

    2. It would be ludicrous to surround ourselves with so many enemies. The Left would be up to its old imperialist and subversive tricks from day one. They would collude with the Latinos and Blacks. There would be military and media hostility. There would be widespread Jewish manipulation and control of all of these Leftist States. They would acquire nuclear arms. We would be treated like Iran.

    3. Land is everything. Our power and thus safety would be largely contingent on what our enemies could get away with, what they could not, and what they needed from us. Other than a few large reservations for Blacks, Latinos (drawn on your map), and perhaps another multiculturalist ghetto (I suggest either Los Angeles or Chicago as a first thought) we would have to acquire most of the rest of the country.

    4. Liberal whites need to be re-educated. This can either come through camps or the harsh reality of marauding dindus. We’ll put them on the front lines. For one reason or another, Lefstist Whites are a large portion of our genetic best. We need to reclaim them, not cut them off. Those that are intransigent will eventually be dealt with, likely by deportation off of the continent.

    5. Jews need to be required to immigrate to Israel due to their insistence on Jewish nationality. Having a large population of them in-country is too inherently subversive and is quite historically doomed to fail. Let’s not keep doing the same thing over and over again. Though, to sweeten the deal, I’d be willing to consider assisting them in gaining more land in the ME with the contingency that it doesn’t threaten Petroleum security. In return, they’d have to immediately cease colluding with China in all respects.

    6. We would likely need to have some say in the population flows to and from the ethnic “nations” on the continent. For instance, we couldn’t have waves of communist soldiers from some Dindustan enter Aztlan or the Black State. We may need to insist on military bases within those States.


  6. Tom says:

    …And Pennsylvania would never work in the United States of the Atlantic, culturally speaking. It’s a Red State with one and a half large Blue population centers. The Blue parts could be relocated or amputated. The rest of the State is largely WN.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. rogerunited says:

    Three things jump out at me:
    1) A black state is going to be Haiti at best, an outpost of multiculti New England or some other potential enemy who will hand out the gibs at worst. It will always be a source of smugglers and marauding.

    2) If their history is any guide, American Indians probably won’t migrate anywhere, they are very attached to their land. I don’t think this would be a problem with Eastern tribes, they have been relatively friendly for the last 150 years or so and mostly keep to themselves. The more aggressive Indians out West could potentially be a problem if the gibs spigot is shut off. I think a better idea would be to keep the reservation system or even give them their own nations. I think they would deal for resources since they can’t support themselves without welfare.

    3) Alaska is very dependent on fed government subsidies. In the event that fed gov is no longer able to support the state, I’m betting half the white population will leave immediately, especially the city people, ie the ones with money. Alaska could revert to a native state or more likely be retaken by Russia; it already has a large sub populatioin of ethnic Russians with ties to the Russian mainland and a large Orthodox population. Maybe Canada or China would make a play for it, too.

    Just some thoughts. This is my favorite LARP subject, too!

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Dirtnapninja says:

    Nunavut cannot survive on its own. It will go wherever anglo canada goes. The Maritime Provinces have their own unique history, and could possibly form their own country, but they are 90%+ white, and do not ideneity much with New England. They are far more likely to go wherever anglo canada goes. Newfoundland will go wherever the Maritimes go. Labrador is part of Newfoundland, and its identity very different from Quebec. It will go with Newfoundland or Anglo Canada unless Quebec is willing to risk a war.


  9. Pingback: Chinese Demography and the Ethno-Technostate | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  10. Pingback: On Doomism | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  11. Pingback: White Nationalism FAQ | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  12. Pingback: Lawrence Murray, "White Nationalism FAQ" | Counter-Currents Publishing

  13. Pingback: The American Balkanization Masterpost | ATLANTIC CENTURION | behindertvertriebentessarzblog

  14. Pingback: Identity Politics are Ripping Us Apart? For You | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  15. Lan says:

    @rogerunited Alaska may receive a lot of federal subsidies, and it may still pay out the ass for the basics because of (((economics))), but the state has some of the world’s largest landings for seafood, has huge oil and gas reserves, has plentiful timber,and huge untapped mining deposits. Alaska could survive as it’s own nation- no problem. It would probably get jewed harder than most, the state already cucks for oil companies for cheap.


  16. Pingback: Anglo-American Diversity | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  17. Pingback: Alternative Right: ANGLO-AMERICAN DIVERSITY – The Americanist

  18. Pingback: Dindu Terror in Dallas: A Case of Applied Third Worldism | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  19. Niko Jimenez says:

    In my humble opinion This is exactly what our enemies want is to break up the USA. A division by race, a microcasm of racial division representation of the world here in America. We must no allow it to happen. Our enemies cannot defeat us militarily so they plan to defeat us from within by dividing us. External influence from nation states want us to divide. They are perpetuating racial divide. Sun Tzu said the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. We are figthing ourselves, destroying ourselves, our enemies do not need to fight to destroy us, we are doing it for them. Example of our enemies who will benefit from our destruction to name a few are Iran, China, Russia, Islamists Jihadists. In my entire 40 year old life as an American who lived across the USA in the North East, South, South West, Mid West, and West Coast, I have never seen this much racial division. I am a brown skin mixed race minority who have observed division that is perpetuated by Obama’s left liberal agenda and the liberal media in the last eight years.


    • On some level I truly sympathize with your loyalty to what was once the United States, an Anglophone country built on a majority European culture that valued assimilation and nationalism over interracial grievance mongering and uncontrolled immigration policies. That system worked and produced the most powerful empire in history. But those days are behind us and the reality is that many people of your background are growing up to hate the United States and its people because of “racism,” and these millions are more of a threat than any Russian or Saudi. The most efficient way to deal with this simmering cauldron of toxic and hateful identity politics is self-determination, to break it up into more efficient and less divided smaller parts. Good fences make good neighbors. That is the only possibility for peace in North America between its chaffing identity groups.


  20. Pingback: America’s Consensus Pronounced Dead | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  21. Senatssekretär Freistaat Danzig says:

    Reblogged this on behindertvertriebentessarzblog.


  22. Timotao Adame says:

    Interesting read, but an aspect not mentioned are the effects south of the rio grande. Unknown to most Americans is the white/ Indio divide in Mexico and Latin America, prevalent to varying degrees all the way to the tip of South America. Simply watch a Telemundo novela to see the non-pc treatment the white ruling class displays towards the brown Indians. There are no holds barred in calling out in inferior Indians. In fact, the whole migration drive north, supported and encouraged by the white Mexican ruling class is no more than ethnic cleansing. When the shit finally explodes here, the repercussions will be felt throughout both continents.


  23. Pingback: Milo’s Alt-Right | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  24. Dave Alera says:

    I’m so glad that my home state is part of the Anglo-American Republic!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s