Coronated States of America

One popular trope is that the US splits into its constituent “American nations” in the aftermath of some disaster or apocalyptic event.

Alfred Twu has been tracking this for Corona, best thread here.

Logical. In a country where states have so much power, much of the response would likewise be at the state level, with a wide range of outcomes due to geographic/cultural heterogeneity and differing competence levels. This will be accentuated by the political/ideological divisions over the proper Corona response.

Anyhow, here’s the most interesting question: #WhoWouldWin?

Clearly the most powerful states are the Western States Pact, Midwest Partnership, and Regional Advisory Council, with ~60 million people each.

Western States Pact (i.e. the NCR) will have very powerful aeronaval forces, but can’t exactly project over the Rockies. The techno-commercialists breaking off won’t do them much good either. At least Dr. House took Las Vegas, not Silicon Valley.

Midwest Partnership vs. Regional Advisory Council likely goes to former. They’re more red-blooded. Latter has more brains but that won’t count for much. The Commonwealth has too few people to compete.

Anatoly Karlin is a transhumanist interested in psychometrics, life extension, UBI, crypto/network states, X risks, and ushering in the Biosingularity.


Inventor of Idiot’s Limbo, the Katechon Hypothesis, and Elite Human Capital.


Apart from writing booksreviewstravel writing, and sundry blogging, I Tweet at @powerfultakes and run a Substack newsletter.


  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. Isn’t the divide in the US like urban vs rural, so you have blue islands engulfed by a red sea, so it will turn out more like Syria, Lebanon, or Northern Ireland, plus the army and the police will overwhelmingly side with the reds, white liberals unilaterally giving up their guns is really stupid in this case. And looking at the ideologies, you would probably have 6 or 7 separate ideologies jockeying for position here. How any granola chewing white liberals know how to manage a farm, or the local water and power supply, or the logistics of food distribution?

  3. Kent Nationalist says

    Clearly the most powerful states are the Western States Pact, Midwest Partnership, and Regional Advisory Council, with ~60 million people each.

    The Southern states (light green) are the strongest; most of the soldiers engaged in actual fighting are from there and they have already nearly beaten all the other states combined. Much stronger than the faggy mauve Regional Advistory Council.

  4. “TN, MS, AL, GA, SC, FL in talks to coordinate” doesn’t sound like a very coherent polity. I’d give them the win if they had Texas.

  5. Don’t southern states have higher obesity rates?

  6. Who would win depends on who gets the nuclear arsenal after the break up. If all of them get some then the ones with the biggest cities will lose the conflict, if Los Angeles, New York, etc are destroyed then the rest of the surviving population will not have too much left for effective fighting, more rural populations should have the edge then.

  7. Southern states don’t have the cognitive juice to drive a national economy. Southern states are basically the hands that manufacture foreign automobiles and other low skill manufacturing.

    The south does have a lower tax rate than other areas which is good also less beaurocracy but that is about it.

    Also, a factor I didn’t see get touched on is social stability in the aftermath with different races. I think the west has less racial tensions than the south which is a powder keg waiting to blow.

  8. I hope you realize that knowing how to manufacture and fuel an automobile will count for far more in post-apocalyptic combat than knowing how to program Candy Crush app or whatever other garbage widget our “cognitive juice” is currently producing.

    That said, the other poster had it right – obesity will be a problem.

    The Southern Army will consist of mechanized turbo diesel wheel chairs equipped with rocket launchers and carrying obese diabetics. In Mad Max fashion, they will invade the world seeking not fuel, but insulin.

  9. The Big 3 still have a lot of factories in the snowbelt, plus Boeing’s factory in Everett.

  10. AltSerrice says

    Midwest Partnership definitely seems to be in the strongest position.

    For one, I’d imagine it has the least minorities as a % of the population, despite the notorious problems of Chicago and Detroit. Indiana would quickly join it, as it is surrounded, and the low-population Dakotas, Nebraska, Iowa, etc would either join willingly or fold with ease – providing it without abundant fuel and food supplies. On the West, the Mississippi River and its tributaries along with the great plains provide ample natural defences against any move by the NCR to push past the Rockies. In the East and South the Appalachians provide a natural border, with perhaps only 200km of easy-access flatland shared by the Midwest and Regional Advisory Council.

    On a more political level, it also seems to be the bloc than can promise the most to prospective allies. Even things like food and fuel aside, it’s quite possible that it would take on a white right-wing identity. This is in stark contrast to the the two other main blocs, and makes it a far more appealing ideological partner for the Southern States. The people are also more ‘red blooded’ as you say.

    As I see it, it’s the only major bloc of the three that would be largely self-sufficient in food and fuel, and it has the best geographic, demographic, and political positioning. My money is with the Midwest.

    PS: on an amusing sidenote, I just recalled that the same Midwestern states are where the Combined Syndicates of America spawns in the Hearts of Iron 4 Kaiserreich mod – and it usually wins the 2nd US civil war.

  11. Who would win?

    Canada and the British Crown.

  12. Blinky Bill says

    My money’s on Canuck land.

    Grudge Match !!!

    At least that’s how most Canadians felt when a special Commission handed down it’s decision on the Alaska panhandle dispute.

    On October 20 1903, the Commission of three Americans, two Canadians, and one Briton, handed down it’s decision on the long-standing border dispute between Canada and the US regarding the actual border between Alaska and British Columbia.

    In the early 1800’s Alaska belonged to Russia, and Canada belonged to Britain, and America was already threatening to expand northward.

    A portion of a map published in 1926 showing the various claims to land along the west Coast. The final decision prevented Canada from having access to the ocean.

    In 1824 the Russo American agreement stated that no American colony would be established along the west coast or island north of 54°40′, and no Russian colony south of that point.

    Then the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1825 chose that same point to vaguely define Russian possession along the coast although it was more of a trading agreement between a Russian company and the Hudsons Bay Company (HBC) and made no reference to sovereignty.

    In the US, there was a strong movement to expand into what was still HBC controlled territory, up to 54-40 and the slogan “54-40 or fight” was often heard.

    To protect it’s own interests against American expansion pressure, and an influx of Americans’ into small gold rushes, the colony of British Columbia was created in 1858. By 1867 however, it was faced with remaining as a British colony, joining Canada, or being annexed by the US. In Britain, the feeling to that point was not very strong to have it remain as a part of the Empire “The Times” and one point stating, “ British Columbia is a long way off. . . . With the exception of a limited official class it receives few immigrants from England, and a large proportion of its inhabitants consists of citizens of the United States who have entered it from the south”

    However when the US bought Alaska from Russia in 1867, Britain realized that having B.C within its sphere of influence would be beneficial to its interests in the Pacific.

    B.C. also had its own verision of its territory as related to the Alaska panhandle, when it joined Canadian Confederation in 1871 and pushed for a survey as Russian maps of 1825 showed the Russians and now Americans having more territory than it would seem according to the treaties.

    In 1872 the US rejected surveys as being too expensive and the US-Canada/BC dispute simmered.

    In 1898, the Klondike gold rush was at its height, with thousands of mostly American miners turning the region from a remote almost uninhabited wilderness without importance into a bustling hive of activity and commercial importance. That year a joint high-commission worked out a boundary compromise, but American interests objected so strongly the compromise was dropped.

    In 1901, the US under President Teddy Roosevelt began applying his policy of “speak softly but carry a big stick”. Canadian shipments were being held up, and Canadians in Alaska began experiencing harassment and denial of certain rights.

    In 1903 the Hay/Hebert Treaty called for a panel to determine the border. Roosevelt had instructed the three US members to make the “right” decision or he would have to send in the US military, leaving rather clear doubt as to the impartiality of the US side.

    The two Canadian members, (and all Canadians) meanwhile presumed they would get British support in return for Canada’s contribution in Britain’s Boer War.

    Britain however was more concerned about creating good relations with the US, and the British member sided with the US in a decision handed down October 20, 1903.

    Richard Everard Webster, 1st Viscount Alverstone cast his vote in favour of the Americans, as part of Britains desire to promote better relations with the US. Canada saw this as a betrayal.

  13. Lars Porsena says

    Indiana would quickly join it, as it is surrounded,

    You know nothing of Indiana.

    I think it’s kind of hilarious there is that giant hole in the middle of the Midwest pact states that just says “Fuck you, restaurants are open. And smoking is allowed in bars.”

  14. Actually the cultural divide is between the urban/suburbs and rural areas, and I would dispute how individualistic rural whites are, given that some of the highest contributing counties per capita are located in red state rural areas.

  15. Kent Nationalist says

    I think it’s kind of hilarious there is that giant hole in the middle of the Midwest pact states that just says “Fuck you, restaurants are open. And smoking is allowed in bars.”

    The Belarus of the Midwest

  16. songbird says

    It depends on how messed up the rest of the world was. I imagine having seaports would be a major advantage, and I expect China would be projecting power on the West Coast, and that Europe is probably too messed up – with too many internal concerns – to do the same, to the same degree, on the East Coast.

    Meanwhile, it would be pretty easy to limit traffic within the Mississippi by blockade or by laying mines or by air attack.

    Of course, I don’t think the eggheads should be dismissed so easily because they can make drones. There are a lot of weapons that have never been fielded because of political objections.

  17. Considering how tightly packed Silicon valley is it can be wiped out with MIRVs from a single missile launched from a red state, or just be MOABed.

  18. Very interesting, I’ve always wondered how Canada ended up with such a strange border on the west coast.

    Brits being perfidious, as usual.

    I also believe that French Canadians would welcome the return of the former French possessions to the Quebec’s mighty sphere of influence.

    That would make New Nouvelle France or to shorten it N2F, as a major part of Canadian confederation.

    Moreover, Vermont, Northern Maine around Caribou and parts of Illinois should also be reclaimed for the Quebecois to feel that historical wrongs inflicted upon their ancestors by the Yankees are fully rectified.

    On the other hand, for obvious reasons I think they will prefer leaving Detroit and some parts of Chicago within the American sovereignty.

    And way up north, maybe Russians would take back Alaska and launch a joint exploitation of its riches with the Chinese?

    Shall they annex Northern California too after a referendum and declare Fort Ross its historic capital?

    Time will tell…

  19. What about a North American version of Orania?

  20. In Northern Maine maybe?

    With Caribou as its capital.

    I mean this is one of the “whitest” populations in North America.

    And the climate is quite similar to the south Siberia to which the two main Indo-European population haplogroups R1a and R1b trace their origins.

    So Whites will feel at home there.

    It will have to be bilingual though: French and English.

  21. The scenery is a lot better in Montana, Idaho, or Wyoming though. Also the more remote it is the less anybody will want it.

  22. The scenery is a lot better in Montana, Idaho, or Wyoming though


    Northern Maine has also some outstanding scenery:

    The relative proximity to St Lawrence river and Atlantic ocean would allow for sustained economic development.

    The incompatible minorities might be kept at bay by enforcing a mandatory bilingual education with satisfactory results before benefiting from any social services or welfare programs.

    An oath of allegiance would also be required.

    The province flag might be a Blue Moose under a White Star on a Red Field.

  23. Lars Porsena says

    Gentlemen, Indiana has broken out.

    They now have uncontrolled access to West Virginia. Ohio has lifted corona restrictions and made all mandates voluntary.

  24. songbird says

    In case of nukes, on a regional level, presumably, first strike would take all. I wonder it is even possible to target other states with state-based ICBMs from the perspective of the design of the rockets and ballistic path. Though, I guess bombers and subs would probably work.

  25. You can immediately kiss 90% of state borders goodbye. A bunch of cities are split by them, and they by God will try to merge ’em

  26. It’s referred to as “Kentucky North.”

    Largely settled by southerners moving north, so it’s rather different from its neighbors. Erie PA is analogous (further East, it is populated by Appalachian people who are very different from the others on the Great Lakes).