Anything that has Utah being with California should be ignored. Mormons would take every opportunity to make the State of Deseret if they could. California splitting in half would make sense but along the State of Jefferson lines is more likely to me.
People making these maps truly have no understanding of half of the states' politics. There is no way Nazi Idaho is going to go with Canada, California, or Minnesota. They would literally fight to the last enslaved child soldier rather than let either of those possibilities happen. They're going with Utah to make Deseret. Illinois is never gonna vibe with TX or PA, they're even more likely to tie in with Minnesota than Colorado is. Michigan's two peninsulas will absolutely end up separated, the only things unifying them are the bottle tax and pot. Pennsylvania is way more likely to split into three parts than it is to split in two.
Breaking stuff down by state or even county is nonsensical. Urban/rural divides, cultural divisions and geographical boundaries are far more likely to factor in, and exactly zero US balkanization maps factor these things in.
IS THIS LIKELY TO BE ACCURATE?
Probably not, but it's precise, and if Nate Silver has taught us anything, it's that precision matters more than accuracy.
I'm not convinced a balkanized US would even split along traditional state lines except in cases where the borders are rivers or mountains. The state borders are completely fictional and set up according to things like slave compromises or like treaties with France from 1740. They'd have no current geopolitical stakes.
The only one I could see being a problem is Louisiana, because their roads are noticably worse than every other state, so they'd be more difficult to annex
People forget that Mormons are a scary folk. Like I know Ammon Bundy and his family are at the end of some jokes but they are your classic example of a Mormon with a gun that does stupid shit for land.
Even then, there is some deep seated hostility between California and Texas on multiple levels. Like, they're major internal economic rivals. They have state leaders that are constantly sniping at one another. There's a material cultural divide. About the only thing the two can agree on is how much they hate migrants. And that extends as much to internal migration (Dallas/Houston/Austinites hating all these new big money California techies / San Fransisco and LA hating the blond bumpkins and their hick habits) as to cross border.
New Texas will be lucky to keep its hands on El Paso, much less stretch itself all the way across New Mexico and Arizona into the Baja Peninsula. San Diego sure as fuck doesn't want anything that Texas is selling.
New Texas would have a cartel run puppet government within a year. This is a deeply held belief I have. The oil money ghouls would never give up the ports and refineries. New Texas wouldn't have the strip of land going from Corpus Christi all the way to Port Arthur. It would all get seized by Saudi Arabia or a coalition of interests representing them, and that's including Corpus, Houston, Beaumont, and everything between. Various gulf monarchies already own huge stakes in all that land and oil of current real life Texas. They're not gonna give up some of their biggest ports in North America just because some bumpkins decided they wanted to play at being Stephen F. Austin.
New Texas immediately runs out of money, sells the state to the Sinaloas or Golfos or whoever else tosses money around. International oil committee seizes the southern coastline.
Any Cali regime that doesnt immediately put down Jefferson reactionaries like the dogs they are is fated to fail. Theres no way a bunch of suburban middle class morons in norcal could possibly compete with the economic power and sheer population advantage of everything south of Sac.
Michigan will never join Ohio. The rivalry is legendary.
We have more in common with Minnesota and Wisconsin. If Michigan joins the Minnesota / Colorado branh the amount of power of the nation's fresh water sources would be overwhelming. The Great Lakes, the Mississippi and Colorado river basin. The farmlands.
My 7th grade history teacher was from Ohio, and he said if they won some big football game against Michigan then he wouldn't assign homework for the rest of the year. They won, it ruled
I'm willing to believe this is an accurate map of what would happen if all the states split up exactly along existing state lines, then fought a bunch of wars of conquest against each other.
Which is a stupid scenario, but being accurate to a stupid scenario makes it better than every other US balkanization map I've seen, so good job.
The stupidest part of this map is assuming that VA/DC/NC would side with Texas 90% of the time lmao. Map made by someone who has apparently never visited that part of the Eastern Seaboard
I don't think this map factors in culture at any point, just civilian numbers, national guard strength, and tax revenue. It's just a simple "if X declared war on Y, who would win?"
It begins...
(Also does someone remember who made this? I can't find the post on here 😔)
lmao
it's ok, 99% of wordpress sites are php
Anything that has Utah being with California should be ignored. Mormons would take every opportunity to make the State of Deseret if they could. California splitting in half would make sense but along the State of Jefferson lines is more likely to me.
People making these maps truly have no understanding of half of the states' politics. There is no way Nazi Idaho is going to go with Canada, California, or Minnesota. They would literally fight to the last enslaved child soldier rather than let either of those possibilities happen. They're going with Utah to make Deseret. Illinois is never gonna vibe with TX or PA, they're even more likely to tie in with Minnesota than Colorado is. Michigan's two peninsulas will absolutely end up separated, the only things unifying them are the bottle tax and pot. Pennsylvania is way more likely to split into three parts than it is to split in two.
Breaking stuff down by state or even county is nonsensical. Urban/rural divides, cultural divisions and geographical boundaries are far more likely to factor in, and exactly zero US balkanization maps factor these things in.
Am I gonna have to do this myself?
Tbf he says at the bottom
I'm not convinced a balkanized US would even split along traditional state lines except in cases where the borders are rivers or mountains. The state borders are completely fictional and set up according to things like slave compromises or like treaties with France from 1740. They'd have no current geopolitical stakes.
The only one I could see being a problem is Louisiana, because their roads are noticably worse than every other state, so they'd be more difficult to annex
Even back in the 90s in school we were taught that Utah had to give up land to become a state instead of polygamy stuff.
It's based on the strength of their national guards, so it'd be moreso about how much California values those uranium mines.
People forget that Mormons are a scary folk. Like I know Ammon Bundy and his family are at the end of some jokes but they are your classic example of a Mormon with a gun that does stupid shit for land.
but national guardsmen are known for being out of shape, stupid and scammers, they're not real soldiers.
National Lard
California has a large Mormon community and Utah has a sizeable population that like having lots of fancy food, cheap imports, and money.
No it wouldn't. Outside of a few particularly loud assholes, nobody actually wants to make it harder to travel up and down the West Coast.
Yeah the only split I could see in California is if New Texas reeeeeally wanted a pacific port
Even then, there is some deep seated hostility between California and Texas on multiple levels. Like, they're major internal economic rivals. They have state leaders that are constantly sniping at one another. There's a material cultural divide. About the only thing the two can agree on is how much they hate migrants. And that extends as much to internal migration (Dallas/Houston/Austinites hating all these new big money California techies / San Fransisco and LA hating the blond bumpkins and their hick habits) as to cross border.
New Texas will be lucky to keep its hands on El Paso, much less stretch itself all the way across New Mexico and Arizona into the Baja Peninsula. San Diego sure as fuck doesn't want anything that Texas is selling.
New Texas would have a cartel run puppet government within a year. This is a deeply held belief I have. The oil money ghouls would never give up the ports and refineries. New Texas wouldn't have the strip of land going from Corpus Christi all the way to Port Arthur. It would all get seized by Saudi Arabia or a coalition of interests representing them, and that's including Corpus, Houston, Beaumont, and everything between. Various gulf monarchies already own huge stakes in all that land and oil of current real life Texas. They're not gonna give up some of their biggest ports in North America just because some bumpkins decided they wanted to play at being Stephen F. Austin.
New Texas immediately runs out of money, sells the state to the Sinaloas or Golfos or whoever else tosses money around. International oil committee seizes the southern coastline.
Any Cali regime that doesnt immediately put down Jefferson reactionaries like the dogs they are is fated to fail. Theres no way a bunch of suburban middle class morons in norcal could possibly compete with the economic power and sheer population advantage of everything south of Sac.
Michigan will never join Ohio. The rivalry is legendary.
We have more in common with Minnesota and Wisconsin. If Michigan joins the Minnesota / Colorado branh the amount of power of the nation's fresh water sources would be overwhelming. The Great Lakes, the Mississippi and Colorado river basin. The farmlands.
My 7th grade history teacher was from Ohio, and he said if they won some big football game against Michigan then he wouldn't assign homework for the rest of the year. They won, it ruled
You don't need fancy algorithms. Just balkanise the US into the areas Europeans know:
That's where Avengers Tower is!!!
I'm willing to believe this is an accurate map of what would happen if all the states split up exactly along existing state lines, then fought a bunch of wars of conquest against each other.
Which is a stupid scenario, but being accurate to a stupid scenario makes it better than every other US balkanization map I've seen, so good job.
The stupidest part of this map is assuming that VA/DC/NC would side with Texas 90% of the time lmao. Map made by someone who has apparently never visited that part of the Eastern Seaboard
I don't think this map factors in culture at any point, just civilian numbers, national guard strength, and tax revenue. It's just a simple "if X declared war on Y, who would win?"
that makes it worse
I think it would be simpler, US is gonna break on 3 parts:
ReichRepublicThe Enclave aka Almost Half of Original ColoniesFederal Government