Can the states listed in Part IV secede from the United States? Will they eventually? Consider U.S. history first before answering.

1. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 1
The following will sound like proselytizing a political viewpoint, but I propose it is an amalgamation of facts
that lead to at least a potential, if not undeniable, conclusion. A revolution has begun with a combination of
“Brexit” and Donald Trump as President of the United States. It is a revolution of the Western Civilization
private industry working class, the class that created the modern day world economy and the class that has
been shrinking for some time. This revolution is about the eventual rise of worldwide nationalism, and it is
starting in the United States. The revolution will continue and expand because of the growing realization that
the cheap resources that have driven the world economies since the end of World War II are rapidly
dwindling. The revolution will culminate within twenty years when the surviving nations, the ones with some
significant level of natural resources, resort to an every-man-for-himself policy.
This is about the path that I think the most conservative section of the United States will take. The timing will
be heavily dependent on the success of the Trump agenda that he talked about pre-election. Talk is cheap,
but the kind of action he has proposed isn’t, especially for a country that is in irreconcilable debt already.
Whatever success Trump has, it won’t be enough; but it won’t be for lack of trying. In the eventual end, the
survival instinct will be paramount in the states of the present-day United States that have most of the
resources and the least number of overpopulated cities totally dependent on the welfare state. These states
are identified in Part IV. Now shall we consider the following history lesson, and then let’s theorize about the
implications for industry, especially the petrochemical industry, in future parts.
Will the Unites States eventually split into two or more countries? Why not? Married couples split when their
differences become irreconcilable. Is it better to stay together until the differences result in violence? Is that
good for any children (the citizens)? Is it good for the two parties (the ideologically opposed states)?
Employees and employers split up when either party is not fulfilling one or the others objectives. What’s
wrong with that? Why are states any different? Later I will give you the main reason argued for why not.
When you hear arguments against secession of individual states, that is when you know the belief in
centralized power as the savior of humanity is firmly entrenched in the consciousness of the arguer, and it is
not limited to the U.S. Democratic Party. A union or association, whatever it is, works best when it exists
between like-minded individuals. It doesn’t work well, and shouldn’t, when one more powerful individual,
group, or location dictates what the other should be doing and thinking. How many times throughout history
does that have to be demonstrated?
This concept of maximum freedom within minimum laws to protect property rights and life and limb started to
be desecrated in the United Sates with the rise of the Republican Party (ironically) in Ripon, Wisconsin March
1854 by former members of the Whig Party who established a new party to oppose the spread of slavery into
the western territories. Note their original objective was to oppose the spread of slavery, not outlaw slavery
which was still lawful and in use mainly in the south. The Whig Party needed a hero, as most humans usually
do, and an enforcer of their ideals on others. They finally found one in Abraham Lincoln, a Kentuckian lawyer
and politician who had a history of trying to save people from themselves.
From History.com:
“The Republicans rapidly gained supporters in the North, and in 1856 their first presidential candidate, John
C. Fremont, won 11 of the 16 Northern states. By 1860, the majority of the Southern slave states were
publicly threatening secession if the Republicans won the presidency. In November 1860, Republican
Abraham Lincoln was elected president over a divided Democratic Party, and six weeks later South Carolina
formally seceded from the Union. Within six more weeks, five other Southern states had followed South
Carolina’s lead, and in April 1861 the Civil War began when Confederate shore batteries under General
P.G.T. Beauregard opened fire on Fort Sumter in South Carolina’s Charleston Bay.
What did Lincoln and his “federalists” buddies accomplish?

2. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 2
1. The union was maintained, but at what cost and to whose benefit?
2. According to some accounts, about 620,000 soldiers alone died, which is equivalent to 6 million
today.
3. Slavery was evil, no doubt, but what did the freed black Americans get out of it in the long run? Well, I
suppose you could have asked the blacks in most of the country prior to WWII. What they ultimately
got after the Johnson “Great Society” was the start of increasing dependence on centralized
government and promises to solve all their problems by taking money from others by force, if
necessary. Thomas Jefferson warned that “A government big enough to give you everything you
want, is strong enough to take everything you have.” What big government took away from many
black Americans was dependence on family, but gave to any who wanted it total dependence on the
state. Now that dependence can only continue if the middle class, whatever race, continues to pay for
it. It’s obvious now they aren’t, at least in the states listed in Part IV.
4. You cannot legislate against ignorance without infringing upon freedom. Moreover, the result is just a
superficial solution that does not have genuine, lasting effect. It just builds up hidden and eventually
active animosity. That is proven in the period from post-civil war until the mid-twentieth century.
Two of the most outstanding Americans of the twentieth century, in my opinion, are Walter Williams and
Thomas Sowell, two PhDs in Economics. The former grew up in a poor black neighborhood of Philadelphia.
The latter grew up in an equally poor black neighborhood in Harlem. That didn’t stop either one of them, and
they overcame the easy way offered by liberal white politicians. Their intelligence and constant search for
facts and logic makes them far superior to any white Keynesians who constantly preach about how
government can solve your problems, and no critical thinking is necessary. Williams had this to say about the
War Between the States:
“The War between the States… produced the foundation for the kind of government we have today:
consolidated and absolute, based on the unrestrained will of the majority, with force, threats, and intimidation
being the order of the day. Today’s federal government is considerably at odds with that envisioned by the
framers of the Constitution. … [The War] also laid to rest the great principle enunciated in the Declaration of
Independence that ‘Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed’.”
How did this happen? How did Lincoln get elected? Lincoln was an ambitious go-getter no doubt. From
history books, we know that Lincoln grew up in Kentucky and Indiana and was self-educated. He became a
lawyer in Illinois and joined the Whig Party and served as an Illinois congressman from 1846 to 1854. He
became a leader of the new Republican Party (formed in 1854) in Illinois. He lost the Illinois Senate race to
Stephen Douglas in 1858. In 1860, he won the republican nomination for President, which is very curious.
Lincoln initially was not in favor of forcing the south to abolish slavery, but once he was elected, the
Abolitionists in the Republican Party would have eventually forced him to act. We will never know because
South Carolina seceded immediately and later tried to forcibly remove U.S. troops from Fort Sumter.
Lincoln made it clear in his inauguration address that he would use force to preserve the union. Why? You
have to understand the Lincoln mentality, which is not at all like most of the Founding Fathers except arguably
Alexander Hamilton. One of Lincoln’s quotes was “Sir, it is not my concern that God is on my side; it is my
concern to be on God’s side, for God is always right.” You see Lincoln was convinced he knew what God (the
heavenly type or the state created type) wanted and God wanted the union preserved, and Lincoln was the
right hand of God. The gigantic statue of Lincoln in Washington, D.C., the mecca of the bureaucrats, is
testament to the purity of the “union”. Contrast this to what some the Founding Fathers said in their time.

3. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 3
Thomas Jefferson:
When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it
will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and
oppressive as the government from which we separated.
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small
a degree of it.
Benjamin Franklin:
Any society that will give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
James Madison:
Oppressors can tyrannize only when they achieve a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed
populace.
Washington:
A free people not only be armed and disciplined, but they shall have sufficient arms and ammunition to
maintain a status of independence from any who may attempt to abuse them, which would include their own
government.
The above doesn’t sound like individuals who were enamored with centralized government control since they
were actively involved, at their personal risk, in secession from Great Britain. Washington’s words were the
strongest. What he suggested is exactly what South Carolina did.
Below are the results of the 1860 election. Three different political parties were involved. The Democratic
Party vote split between northern and southern states. I will bet few know about the third party, the
Constitutional Union party.
From Wikipedia:
The Constitutional Union Party was a political party in the United States created in 1860. It was made up of
conservative former Whigs who wanted to avoid secession over the slavery issue. These former Whigs (some
of whom had been under the banner of the Opposition Party in 1854–58) teamed up with former Know-
Nothings and a few Southern Democrats who were against secession to form the Constitutional Union Party.
Its name comes from its extremely simple platform, a simple resolution "to recognize no political principle
other than the Constitution of the country, the Union of the states, and the Enforcement of the Laws".
So as shown below, about 180 votes went to Lincoln and the Republican Party, who were opposed to slavery
and were going to outlaw it no matter what the southern states wanted, and they were obviously willing to
back it up with force. Obviously also, they also weren’t going to give the south a divorce, just like a vengeful,
dependent mate wouldn’t. The other 123 votes were spread between the southern Democrats who wanted to
maintain slavery, which they thought was absolutely necessary to the economy based on cotton and
Delaware and Maryland; the Constitutional Union Party who opposed slavery but wanted to avoid secession;
and the northern Democrats who may or may not have cared about slavery but certainly didn’t need it for their
economy. Sounds like a divided country? Do you see any parallels to the present situation? The present
division is for right reasons this time – more big government or infringement on individual rights in order to

4. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 4
realize equal outcomes for all or less big government and creation of opportunities but not guaranteed
outcomes. However, the division is as highly volatile as it was in 1860, and probably as irreconcilable in the
long run as it was then.
What happened? The Confederate States of America happened.
From Confederate States of America:
Confederate States of America: Secession of the Southern States
The Secession of the Southern states took place within the borders of the formerly unified nation of the United
States of America when 11 Southern states rebelled against the government, withdrew from the union, and
declared their status as independent states and republics. The rebel states formed an alliance that was called
the Confederate States of America (CSA), or simply the Confederacy...
Confederate States of America: The 11 Southern States
What were the Confederate States? The Confederate States of America (CSA) consisted of 11 southern
states that seceded from the Union in 1860 and 1861 before, or after, the inauguration of President Abraham
Lincoln. The Confederate States of America, in order of secession, were South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida,
Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. The first 7 states to
secede from the union to form the Confederate States of America, took place before (in February) Abraham
Lincoln took office on March 4, 1861. The 4 border states from the Upper South then seceded and were also
admitted to the Confederate States of America (Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee). The
Confederacy later accepted two additional states (Missouri and Kentucky) as members of the Confederate
States of America although neither of these states officially declared secession nor were they ever controlled
by Confederate forces.

5. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 5
1860 Presidential Election
Candidate Party
Electoral
Votes
Abraham Lincoln Republican 180
John C.
Breckinridge
Democratic 72
John Bell
Constitutional
Union
39
Stephen A.
Douglas
Democratic 12
Do the states that voted for Lincoln look familiar to you? 81.2% of the possible popular vote voted in the
election of 1860. Lincoln won less than 40% of the popular vote, but he had enough electorial votes. The
same heavily populated states that voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 except for Indiana that
switched to Republican in 2012 voted for Lincoln in 1860. Now that their manufacturing jobs have started
disappearing right and left under Obama and Democrat sponsored NAFTA, some are looking to the federal
government again under Trump to save them. It is a never ending story with some of these Midwest states
and a few other swing states first looking to Democrats then looking to Republicans, whoever makes the right
kind of promises. The result is a combination of socialism and crony capitalism all wrapped up in an
ingratiating package with an unpayable price tag for future generations. Give a little to the middle class and
promise much to the growing dependent class, but give much more to the upper 1% either directly or by the
default of Federal Reserve easy money. And by all means, keep increasing the number of bureaucrats. Is the
present so-called revolution for Trump a conscious recognition of all this? Not yet! It’s going to take much
more pain for the middle class. Trump is the new captain of the Titanic. He’ll save the day! Well, he couldn’t
do any worse than Obama. One thing is certain; he will keep the Ponzi scheme afloat longer than Hillary
would have; however, the immediate wild card is the growing federal debt.
Wonder why the top 10 wealthiest in the U.S. said before the election that they were going to vote for Hillary?
Simple, keep the masses dependent and the bureaucracy numerous and the money will keep flowing to the
1%. That way the balance of power remains in the hands of the class that ultimately controls whoever is
President. Trump, the master manipulator of debt, is the new target. He says he is above it all. That’s what
Reagan said! If the real ruling class can maintain power, then you can get the President to bail out big banks
again, start new wars to keep the appropriate lobbyist-represented companies satisfied, keep Wall Street
money managers in control of the middle class savings, and put Uncle Sammy further in debt beyond 20
trillion dollars. However, the party will continue for a while longer because the middle class still believe in
heroes and that someone somewhere is going to save them. That’s the theory and what has worked since
1971 when the obvious economic advantage that the U.S had post WWII began to disappear.
One of Thomas Sowell’s cogent quotes is “The most basic question is not what is best, but who shall decide
what is best”. Well, the 1% and their cronies have been deciding what’s best for Americans, and they are so
delusional that they think they can keep the economic party going and globalism is the way to do it. Trump
says globalism is out and nationalism is in. That is the first step in the revolution. When the party crashes,
then the predominantly blue states might eventually get angry enough to really revolt. The Founding Fathers
did, but they were in a human class by themselves. However, time will tell.
This widespread love affair with the welfare state started with another do-gooder, the beloved Franklin Delano
Roosevelt. This is the hero who saved us from Hitler, the Nazis, fascism, Togo, and Japanese imperialism all
from a wheelchair at the expense of about 651,000 battle deaths of mainly very young Americans. He did all
that, but he couldn’t get America out of the Depression no matter how much money he spent. However, he

6. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 6
was successful in starting to get Americans hooked on the concept that centralized government is their savior
of last resort. Lyndon Johnson finished the job.
What World War II did is create a post economic monopoly period not since Rome during the reign of
Augustus. The enemies were almost completely destroyed. The allies’ economies, except maybe Canada and
most of Great Britain, were set back years also. The U.S. had no significant industrial competition during the
early1950s, and then the rest of the world begin to build up again. By 1971, crude oil production in the 48
states had peaked, and all of a sudden the Arabs were beginning to flex oil-developed muscles. Now we
started losing control, and the only way to stay on top was to drop the gold standard and print money. Don’t
worry; the rest of the world will buy our debt because we are the world’s main consumer. Anyway, ever heard
of supply economics? Just add supply nonstop and demand will eventually catch up. Everybody knows that!
That is demand will catch up if you keep printing money. Again, don’t worry, the Baby Boomers understand all
this, and they are certainly willing to mortgage their children’s future to keep the Ponzi scheme intact. That is
where the U.S. is now.
Now comes along the new kid on the block, China. They have Baby Boomers also, and theirs is just as short-
sighted and irresponsible. They like automobiles, houses, and all the others toys Americans have. At least
they like them now that their rulers told them it is ok to like them. Go for it, and they have at even faster pace
than post WWII America. Build, build, build, grow, grow, and grow! There is one problem though. That stuff
that use to be cheap and caused economic expansion post WWII is now getting expensive and harder to find
to boot. Print more money!! That’s always the answer until it becomes worthless.
All countries are now in competitive devaluation of their currencies with the American dollar still on top. The
currency of the country 20 trillion dollars in the hole is on top! What does that tell you? It tells many who are
starting to worry more about the future than next Monday night’s football game that the end of the Age of
Growth is near.
Many are predicting catastrophe now, but no one sees how the future will unfold. Well, open up a world
history book, a good one would be the “History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”. The U.S. Baby
Boomers think, and they have brainwashed the U.S. 13th
and Millennial generations to believe, that the last 70
years is normal. We are about to return to normal for the human race, and every country is going to be
fighting for survival. We are in the early stages of a transition period in history – a period of growth to a period
of survival. There two problems that have to be overcome during this transition period – decreasing demand
and decreasing supply of natural resources at prices that don’t further destroy the already decreasing
demand. The two are inextricably tied together as has been demonstrated since 2008.
Some states in the U.S. have a better chance to make it through the transition period. Those states are listed
in Part IV. They have a majority of the resources to keep the party going longer provided they separate from
the welfare state and don’t create another “kinder and gentler” one. Can they? Will they?
Can they? The federalists, who are certainly not limited to the Democratic Party, say no. A recently deceased,
noted conservative Antonin Scalia, appointed to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan, had this to say about
secession:
Scalia argued that the question was not in the realm of legal possibility because 1) the United States would
not be party to a lawsuit on the issue 2) the “constitutional” basis of secession had been “resolved by the Civil
War,” and 3) there is no right to secede, as the Pledge of Allegiance clearly illustrates through the line “one
nation, indivisible.”
He sounds like Lincoln to me, but not Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, and Washington. That’s the difference
between “conservatives” and Libertarians, which the Founding Fathers sounded like. I submit that most of the

7. US POLITICAL AND SOCIAL DICHOTOMY – IMPLICATIONS
FOR PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRY – Part V
Page 7
conservatives reside in the states listed in Part IV and will be content to accept Scalia’s argument up and until
the Welfare State starts to fall apart and the handouts are no longer possible, and neither are social security
payments. That is when all hell breaks loose. Can Trump hold it together? Probably he can for the next 8
years, but the pressure vessel called “reality” will continue to build explosive pressure during his reign. The
rest of the decade for private industry is going to be an increasingly difficult struggle to navigate the “rapids”
and avoid crashing and drowning.
I guess many foreigners don’t understand Americans. I’m one and I don’t understand them either, especially
my generation. They have this unbreakable optimism that everything is going to be ok if we just find the right
hero. Much of industry has this Walt Disney outlook that “If you can dream, you can do it”. That’s all well and
good, but nothing and no one can overcome the controlling laws of the universe – the laws of physics and
mathematics. There are limits and the human race is hitting them hard. Americans, especially in the states
listed in Part IV, are more knowledgeable of their local football statistics then they are of human history.
However, they have just like the lowest animals, a built in survival instinct that is going to kick in eventually.
Furthermore, this area may have the largest compliment of potential Libertarians. I may be mistaken, but I
think it is hidden in their blood, their family genetics, and all it will take is a final catastrophe to destroy the
allure of statism. If they don’t, then by mid next decade they will start to feel that centrifugal force against
history’s toilet bowl as they begin to be flushed down the drain with the believers in statism after Mother
Nature once again slams her hand down on the lever.
Further parts will concentrate on possible courses to navigate the “rapids”. I am using the term Petrochemical
Industry generally since it is really divided into three distinct sections – upstream, midstream, and
downstream. I’ll address each one separately starting with upstream (exploration and production of oil and
gas).