Can a House Divided Rebuild Itself?
Usually, projecting long-term into the future regarding foreign policy is a fool’s errand. This is not to say future projections are impossible to make, but rather there is a high chance for error. Since a future historical event could lead to a thousand other events, one wrong prediction or one failed observation drastically alters how we may think the future will look against the actual events that occur in the future. For example, who could have seen in 2013 or 2014 either Brexit or Trump’s election? Forget the fact these occurred in the same year and the experts were predicting a victory for Remain and Clinton even after the polls closed. Imagine the world today if Brexit failed or Clinton won; certainly, Biden would not be President and Cameron could still be the Prime Minister. Who could have seen a global pandemic in 2018? Now imagine trying to predict the future in 2010 without knowing about Brexit, the presidential election of 2016, COVID-19, or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Simply put, predicting how the future will happen should be taken as more of a theoretical exercise than an actual analysis. This is not to say we cannot theorize if America would be able to rebuild itself if it were ever to be divided.
While we use history and geography to be able to answer this question, it is important to be clear we are not predicting an end for America anytime soon. We are not predicting how America ends. We are solely looking into what happens after a theoretical division. But to answer if can America reunite, we must ask what ways can America end. First, we will speculate the two ways America could end and the three ways a breakdown may occur.
As Einstein said, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. With this in mind, let us assume that the first method of division is that America experiences a global calamity wherein the survivors have to pick up the pieces of society. While we are unsure if the technological tree would be uprooted, it is likely at least some, or significant, technological progress would be lost. In this state, we expect society would be built upon a city-state level. For a rough estimate of where these cities would be located, they would likely be where the largest metropolitan areas are today.
The other way America ends is purely internal. One day, the states become tired of one another and decide to part amicably, at least in the short term. There are two unique conditions in this situation compared to the prior apocalyptic scenario. First, technological progress would not be lost to the same degree. While some technologies may fall out of use, since society does not experience the same upheaval the technological level of the states would remain relatively the same. Second, if America does divide amicably, perhaps it does so not on a state level but on a regional one. While this may be true, we will research the issue as if the divide occurs using state boundaries. This would allow us to theorize if some states can naturally form regional groups/nations or if some states would form rivalries.
If America does amicably split into states, we would expect some regions would fare better than others. We would expect both the Northeast and South to perform the best. We would expect the West to perform the worst. And we would expect America to remain divided with no hope of reunification.
The American Northeast is the densest and most interconnected region in the country. Due to the interconnectedness, we would expect either the whole region to unite under one flag or for there to be two regional nations based around the Mid-Atlantic and New England respectively. We expect such a unification due to MAD, mutually assured destruction. If New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania went to war with each other, we would expect New Jersey, New York City, and Philadelphia to suffer great casualties and destruction. To put this in perspective, the metro areas of New York City and Philadelphia have over 25 million people. Both these metro areas also make up nearly half of their respective state’s population and nearly all New Jersey’s population. Due to the interconnectedness of New York City and Philadelphia (and lesser extent Boston and Washington DC), we expect the only way forward is to work together.
The American South does not have the same level of interconnectedness and thus does not have nearly the same incentive to join into a regional group, but it has advantages such as cultural affinity and geography. While Northeastern interests are intertwined, the interests of the Southern States are not intertwined nor competing. While the former helps with forced integration and the latter helps create rivalries, the South has neither situation that allows states to work with each other when and where it makes sense. Due to similar cultural affinity, perhaps a new nation or confederation could emerge. But due to geography, it may allow one state to project power beyond its border… Texas.
Perhaps no other state could do well as an individual state compared to Texas. With a strong manufacturing base, energy resources, and 2nd biggest state in both population and area, Texas is not dependent on other states or nations for its own success. While size does protect its interior, its geography has additional consequences that may make Texas take action to protect its interests. To its South, the Rio Grande and multiple Mountain chains give natural defenses to Texas. To the west, the Rockies should deter any invasion. To the north and east, there is only flat land of the Great Plains until one runs into one of the major rivers in the area. One can easily see how Texas can project its power east to the Mississippi and north to a river of its choosing. And, it is entirely possible these smaller states would welcome the protection. After all, these flat lands will be one of the biggest reasons why the Midwest will suffer.
The other major reason is the lack of water control. For the Midwest to connect to the world, it must either go through the Great Lakes or the Mississippi River System. Unfortunately for the Midwest, not only does it not control the access points through these marine transportation nodes, but it also creates competing interests. While the Northeast is close and compact and the South is large and spread out, the Midwest is in the dangerous middle. This middle is where states’ interests compete with each other but do not align with one another. On Lake Michigan, we can see Indiana and Wisconsin compete with Illinois. For Indiana and Wisconsin, they would be defending their sea/lake rights to Lake Michigan; for Illinois, the defense of Chicago is paramount. Michigan’s Upper Peninsula would bring jealousy out of Wisconsin due to its access to Lake Huron. Both Iowa and Missouri have their major cities on the Mississippi River, while Illinois will mostly focus on Chicago. This uneven situation may cause Missouri and Iowa to fear Illinois if Illinois retaliates for any reason. Due to this, we can see a complicated and changing alliance system that keeps enemies at bay.
However, the worst region due to the dissolved nation would be the West. While water rights are important for the Midwest, this is more due to trade than survival. For the West, water rights are the key to survival (Zeihan 2023). And unfortunately, there is little water for many competing interests. While Texas can succeed on its own, the same may not be true for California. Perhaps no state is as successful due to union as California. With priority on water rights, it allows California to become the most populated state. However, without a hegemonic power, either California needs to take control of the water rights or risk its own future. Unfortunately, other states, such as Arizona, would view water rights in the same existential manner. And unlike the three eastern regions, the West is mostly mountainous. This may make invasion difficult and conquest impossible. It however makes conflict inevitable.
Looking at these regions, it is clear that reunification would be off the table. The Midwest will squabble with itself over economic and political interests. The Southern States would be focused internally and trade externally with a chance of greater confederation for the future. The West would fight itself over water. The Northeast would unify but have little reason to push west over the Appalachian Mountains or south and instead would likely seek economic interests overseas. While Texas is in a strong position, it is not nearly strong enough to take over the rest of the country. And unless someone unites the Eastern half of the nation, the Rockies would prove to be an indomitable challenge to any future Hannibal. Simply put, regional and local interests would prevent any reunification. This of course ignores if foreign actors get involved. If they did, they would either directly or indirectly prevent reunification.
However, this is not the only scenario wherein America divides. What happens if the apocalyptic scenario occurs? In this situation, we could say we would expect the same results. But honestly, it may be even more difficult for reunification. If city-states were to dominate the landscape, we would expect the interconnectedness and, initial, competitiveness to decrease. Over time, we would expect these city-states to also develop their own interests. Due to a lack of similar interests and geographical barriers, we also expect reunification to be off the table. But perhaps the strongest answer to our question lies not in theoretical exercises or geography, but in history.
The creation and expansion of the United States is incredibly unique when compared to most nations. While it would be incorrect to say no one lived in North America, if we were to exclude Mexico, the population was very sparse. Before Columbus, the population of Native Americans who lived on the continent is unknown. Estimates vary between 8.4 million and 112.55 million for both North and South America. However, there seems to be a consistent pattern. It seems the median, and most, estimates project the population of the pre-Colombian Americas around 50 million people, Mexico would almost have a population of 20 million people in these median estimates, and Mexico would have 4.5 times as many people as the modern United States and Canada. If the population of Mexico was 22 million people before Columbus (which would be slightly above the median estimates), that means the population of post-Columbus would likely be around 2 million people (Soto, Stahle, Cleaveland, and Therrell 2002). Such a population decline within Native American populations is due to smallpox and other plagues. Most estimates estimate that 90% of the population succumbed to these plagues and that the population would not grow again for centuries (Soto, Stahle, Cleaveland, and Therrell 2002). If this is the case, the Native American population in the USA and Canada would have been around 450,000 to 500,000 until it grew in the 19th century.
While the total population would be less than half a million, it is important to realize that Native Americans were not one political entity. They formed many political entities. Today, the Federal Government recognizes 574 tribes. Not only would it be reasonable to assume that in the past the number of tribes was greater when compared to the present, but tribes had their own subdivisions and conflicts. To sum it up, the whole population of Native Americans in North America between the 17th and 19th centuries would be less than the smallest state today in an area that is larger than the largest country divided into more political entities that are currently in the United Nations. The worst threat these tribes faced were if a unified power with a shared culture and government were to land on its shores.
In 1607, Jamestown was founded; in 1620, the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock. When they landed, it is possible that the Iroquois were the strongest power in North America. Their population was likely less than 15,000 in the 17th century. By 1640, there were more than 26,000 American colonists (Vancouver Island University). By 1650, Virginia itself would be larger than the Iroquois nation; Massachusetts would be larger by 1660 (Vancouver Island University). By 1680, the number of colonists was ten times the size of the Iroquois (Vancouver Island University). By 1730, there were more colonists living in the thirteen colonies than all Native Americans living in North America (Vancouver Island University). When America eventually became its own country, there were nearly 4 million people (1790 Census); nearly 8 times more than the whole population of Native Americans in the United States and Canada.
While the colonies each of their own history and culture, they were always under the rule of one political entity. The crown. The British ruled the colonists until the colonists revolted, wherein the former colonists then ruled themselves in a new American nation. This one nation had an interest in the Mississippi River Basin and then had an interest in Manifest Destiny. Due to the conditions that North America was in, this conquest was inevitable. However, the conditions that existed back in 1650, 1776, 1845, and 1890 no longer exist.
If America were to divide itself, then it would not be reunified because the option of conquest would be off the table. The conquerors would not find land sparse with population but population centers that rivaled their own. Back in the 17th to 19th centuries, the British and Americans knew they could move westward due to their immense size in population and resources. Even if all the Native Americans were to unite against this expansion, it would likely have not been enough to fight back against this expansion. Any future American city-state trying to recreate an American nation would not have these beneficial conditions to recreate the United States. Any city-state that tried to recreate America would find rivals with similar populations and power. Add these variables to an unforgiving geography and it makes such a task herculean in nature.
So if an apocalyptic scenario occurs, post-apocalyptic America would likely be organized into smaller entities; similar to the Native Americans. This would likely mean the only method for the United States to be reunited is through an outside power that is overwhelming larger and united against these city-states. This would mean that this new nation would not be American, but would likely need an American apocalypse to occur. For the Native Americans, this apocalypse was multiple plagues that killed 90% of the population.
While some politicians talk about division or splitting up the country, we will warn them of the consequences. If America were to be divided and if immediate reunification was not possible, then future reunification would be impossible. This would mean the greatest country in the world and the Shining City Upon Seven Hills would cease immediately be the safe harbor for the world’s people. In the same manner that “a divided house cannot stand” (Lincoln), a divided house cannot be rebuilt. If the house falls, the Shining City Upon Seven Hills falls with it.
