The impractical but plausible fantasy of a national divorce


Citing irreconcilable differences, many commentators on both sides of the red-blue divide have begun channeling country singer Tammy Wynette and contemplating a national divorce. The sentiment appears strongest on the right. Claremont Institute fellow David Reaboi warns of a future in which "the crisis and contempt between Americans builds beyond what is currently imaginable," leaving only pragmatic considerations about who gets the nukes, and "appeals to Boomer Patriotism" as the only basis for national unity.
Others think pop artist Neil Sedaka is closer to the mark than Wynette: Breaking up is hard to do. Much of this discussion can be dismissed as quasi-Civil War cosplay by the Very Online. But we are genuinely two decades into a period of intense political polarization, combined with increasing moral certitude on both sides and profound disagreements over values and basic facts about the nation's history, religion, the nature of biological sex, even the winner of last year's presidential election.
In a country where people follow their senators into restrooms and disown family members over political differences (or at least need to read essays about how to talk to them every Thanksgiving), it is easy to see why people doubt whether the center can hold. Yet the nation's federal constitutional system is set up to maximize the ability of people with different views to live together.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
That is, until progressives decide that institutions like the Senate should be scrapped as undemocratic, letting massive changes be implemented by razor-thin margins, or right-populists begin to see a federal government that barely got Donald Trump elected to run for a single term as the only institution capable of defending conservative values. The things that made the American system capable of accommodating true diversity are under assault by the forces of one-size-fits-all rule just when we need them the most.
Some might conclude the desire for a federal government strong enough to guarantee liberal abortion policies in red states or ban transgender bathrooms in blue ones makes national divorce inevitable. But if the existing constitutional design of the country can't protect us, it's hard to imagine an amicable breakup creating a better one soon.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
W. James Antle III is the politics editor of the Washington Examiner, the former editor of The American Conservative, and author of Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?.
-
Film reviews: Roofman and Kiss of the Spider Woman
Feature An escaped felon’s heart threatens to give him away and a prisoner escapes into daydreams of J.Lo.
-
Broadway actors and musicians are on the brink of a strike
The explainer The show, it turns out, may not go on
-
Pentagon reporters turn in badges after refusing rules
Speed Read They refused to sign a restrictive new press policy imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth
-
Supreme Court points to gutting Voting Rights Act
speed read States would no longer be required to consider race when drawing congressional maps
-
Shutdown: Are Democrats fighting the right battle?
Feature Democrats are holding firm on health insurance subsidies as Trump ramps up the pain by freezing funding and vowing to cut more jobs
-
Could Democrats lose the New Jersey governor’s race?
Today’s Big Question Democrat Mikie Sherrill stumbles against Republican Jack Ciattarelli
-
Gaza peace deal: why did Trump succeed where Biden failed?
Today's Big Question As the first stage of a ceasefire begins, Trump’s unique ‘just-get-it-done’ attitude may have proven pivotal to negotiations
-
Bondi stonewalls on Epstein, Comey in Senate face-off
Speed Read Attorney General Pam Bondi denied charges of using the Justice Department in service of Trump’s personal vendettas
-
‘Every argument has a rational, emotional and rhetorical component’
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Why is this government shutdown so consequential?
Today's Big Question Federal employee layoffs could be in the thousands
-
Shutdown: Democrats stand firm, at a cost
Feature With Trump refusing to negotiate, Democrats’ fight over health care could push the government toward a shutdown