On October 16, 2025, the Anglican Communion split, officially, into two, with the breakaway group calling themselves the actual Anglican Union, and the churches aligned with the Church of England and the incoming Archbishop of Canterbury condemned as something close to heretics.
But that’s not the kind of thing we follow here at ThisIsCommonSense.org.
Speaking of big splits, Mt. Etna may be in the process of splitting into two, with a huge hunk of the mountain predicted to slide off in the Mediterranean Sea. That would be a disaster of possibly horrific proportions. In early June a massive eruption caught world attention. It may be worthwhile to follow current reporting.
But that is also not a topic for these pages.
More relevant are secessionists movements in these United States, with the recent votes, these last few years, in eastern Oregon, in which more than a dozen counties are in effect petitioning the Oregon legislature to be let go, so they can be united with Idaho. It’s called the “Greater Idaho Project,” and Paul Jacob has written about this in these pages.
The occasion for this update is the nifty map and article at Brilliant Maps.
5 replies on “Splits”
My understanding is that only about a quarter of Idahoans are supportive of the Greater Idaho Project, and that about 60% of Idahoans are opposed to the Project, feeling about it roughly as I do about proposals for Provinces of Canada to secede from the Dominion of Canada and join the United States.
So I suggest that western Oregon either seek itself to be a state, or perhaps to join with western Washington, if indeed the western Washingtonians will accept that proposition. Possibly they too would resist. Perhaps Tim could poll his neighbors and then get back to us.
This is all about eastern Oregon. Not western Oregon. And certainly not northwestern Oregon, which is an old socialist hotbed of radicalism and unionism and the like.
Eastern Washington has also repeatedly floated a secessionist movement, but so far they’ve stuck themselves with this new state idea, and fixated on the name of “Liberty,” which would surely be an abomination.
I apologize for my confusion of East and West, which prevails whenever I live on the West Coast. It seems that I always think of the nearest ocean as to the east; I have a friend who was raised in the area of the San Francisco Bay and has the complementary disorder, manifesting when he is on the East Coast.
Still, I think that mutatis mutandis my point is important: Most Idahoans do not want a union with Oregonians, but Washingtonians might accept such a thing.
A point that I failed to make in my earlier comment is that long-standing doctrine is that a constituent state cannot themselves be dissolved without consent or acquiescence not merely of that state but of all other constituent states. Unless the Supreme Court will throw-off that Doctrine of Mysterious Indissoluability — which throwing-off would be portrayed as an unprincipled grab for power — any single state governed by the left can successfully block the creation of a state governed by the right (and v.v.) and has incentive to do so to obstruct the creation of two more Senators on the other side. I think that the Court would indeed reject the Doctrine, which is not so much found in the actual wording of previous decisions as in spin applied to those decisions outside of court. But, still, expect quite some fuss if the … Western Oregonians or Washingtonians attempt to escape the clutches of the folk along Interstate Highway 5.
That’s not how recent polling quoted in a Newsweek (October 12, 2025) article put it: “A 2021 survey by the Oregon Values and Beliefs Center found 38 percent of Oregonians in favor, 42 percent opposed, with higher backing outside the Portland area (44 percent ) versus the metro area (37 percent). On the Idaho side, a Trafalgar Group poll reported that 53 percent of Idahoans believed their state should be prepared to negotiate annexation of Eastern Oregon counties.” [emphasis added]
That is a majority in favor, not a substantial majority opposed. Of course, polling is more a partisan art than a scientific endeavor these days. It may all depend upon which poll you consult.
These things may change over time. Idahoans may come to see a benefit to being a much-bigger state. Then again, they may rethink wanting to take in Oregon rejects.
Incidentally, the real excuse for this post was to quote this one passage now quoted. The editor flaked out.
https://www.newsweek.com/campaign-to-split-oregon-we-want-to-be-governed-by-idaho-10859675
Ah, well, I’d not seen that poll, which is more recent that my last investigation.
Moreover, as no new state would be created, the Mysterious Doctrine whose implications I labored above would be far less likely to be invoked.