Interesting article on re-thinking N. American and European borders:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/kohr-principles/
Smaller countries may work better, according to this writer and researcher.
No way I'm living in a state named 'Atlanta'.
^You may already. When I was studying this in school the popular word for it was 'balkanization.' It's similar to the article I posted a few weeks ago on the EU. Is it on the road to irrelevance or to being a superstate? Tough call. And as the US gets bigger and bigger (population wise) how long will it be able to stay united? I also enjoyed the comparisons of the EU and the US, which, summed up simply, said that they cannot be compared at all :)
Interesting article.
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 12:48:22 PM
No way I'm living in a state named 'Atlanta'.
And why call it Atlanta??!!
How about 'Fred?'
Quote from: Gusington on June 06, 2012, 12:41:00 PM
Interesting article on re-thinking N. American and European borders:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/kohr-principles/
Smaller countries may work better, according to this writer and researcher.
Breaking down Yugoslavia didn't seem to work out so well, at least initially. My initial thoughts are that there have been fewer wars (in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries) fought between larger nations than there have been between smaller nations.
Hmmm...but the wars fought by the larger nations have been the worst wars ever seen in history. So do you want more less-badder wars or less more-badder wars? Isn't it both the same thing?
Does Mirthlandia have a coastline?
Isn't the line of thinking that for internal politics smaller states work better because the 'state' is more in touch with the needs/wants of it's people?
Mirthlandia does have a coastline and all the beaches are nude beaches.
^Gah even for old curmudgeons??
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 02:43:23 PM
Isn't the line of thinking that for internal politics smaller states work better because the 'state' is more in touch with the needs/wants of it's people?
Mirthlandia does have a coastline and all the beaches are nude beaches.
Oooh, I so want that to be true. Please can I have the job of checking out the credentials (cough, cough) of any young ladies who wish to take advantage of these said beaches?
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 02:43:23 PM
Isn't the line of thinking that for internal politics smaller states work better because the 'state' is more in touch with the needs/wants of it's people?
Its called States Rights. 10th Amendment of the Consititution. Often ignored by the Federal government, see any lawsuit brought by the current DOJ against the state of Arizona.
The question of States Rights/Balkanization is going to be a unique answer for America.
No other country, democracy or otherwise, is composed of such diverse ethnicities and cultures. This has been a great strength of our nation, but it also comes with a cost. Some of that cost can be seen in the current culture wars (fwiw, I believe there are far more potent and direct causes of our culture war than culture or ethnic diversity). And it is entirely possible that a return to a more state-oriented government is going to be a better solution for coexistence than the federal system.
That sounds like a bit like the "goals" of balkanization -- i.e., reduce the size of the state to a more congenial majority, and therefore produce a better government for that smaller population. And if that has failed in Europe, we do have one huge mother of an advantage over the deliberately-referenced Old World. Ethnic and cultural groups in America do NOT have the same relationship with geography that an ethnic or cultural group has when the last 20 generations have grown up in the same geographic location. In other words, we have the ability to create an overarching set of ideals for our nation (the constitution), and the option to have population-specific laws within that nation (states rights), and a population far more willing (at least in theory) to relocate to the the population-specific areas with the laws they support.
Now, having said all that, I can sympathize with a theoretical Spaniard wanting to remain a Spaniard first and a European second. But that's largely because I like the governing philosophy of Mirthlandia far better than Atlanta!
Quote from: bob48 on June 06, 2012, 03:37:49 PM
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 02:43:23 PM
Isn't the line of thinking that for internal politics smaller states work better because the 'state' is more in touch with the needs/wants of it's people?
Mirthlandia does have a coastline and all the beaches are nude beaches.
Oooh, I so want that to be true. Please can I have the job of checking out the credentials (cough, cough) of any young ladies who wish to take advantage of these said beaches?
Lifeguard duties for the beaches of Mirthlandia will be apportioned to the various Groghead members.
We don't have to look like David Hasselhoff do we?
Or run in slow motion?
Ummm... but if we want to... can we? Please?
(I'd rather have a torso shaped like an upside down pear than a right side up one.)
Is the incandescent lightbulb legal? Salt allowed on resturant tables? Larger than 16 oz sugar beverages? Mai Tais are pretty sugary you know. I like to enjoy my jumbo sized mai tai at a small table on the patio illuminated by an incandescent lightbulb lamp and a salt shaker at the ready to ward of evil spirits.
Quote from: Bison on June 06, 2012, 07:13:59 PM
Is the incandescent lightbulb legal? Salt allowed on resturant tables? Larger than 16 oz sugar beverages? Mai Tais are pretty sugary you know. I like to enjoy my jumbo sized mai tai at a small table on the patio illuminated by an incandescent lightbulb lamp and a salt shaker at the ready to ward of evil spirits.
Don't try that in New York City.
I'm just trying to gauge what type of utopia you are planning.
It will be a sugary drink, table salt laden, jumbo Mai Tai, incandescently lit paradise!
Quote from: meadbelly on June 06, 2012, 06:16:41 PM
The question of States Rights/Balkanization is going to be a unique answer for America.
No other country, democracy or otherwise, is composed of such diverse ethnicities and cultures. This has been a great strength of our nation, but it also comes with a cost. Some of that cost can be seen in the current culture wars (fwiw, I believe there are far more potent and direct causes of our culture war than culture or ethnic diversity). And it is entirely possible that a return to a more state-oriented government is going to be a better solution for coexistence than the federal system.
That sounds like a bit like the "goals" of balkanization -- i.e., reduce the size of the state to a more congenial majority, and therefore produce a better government for that smaller population. And if that has failed in Europe, we do have one huge mother of an advantage over the deliberately-referenced Old World. Ethnic and cultural groups in America do NOT have the same relationship with geography that an ethnic or cultural group has when the last 20 generations have grown up in the same geographic location. In other words, we have the ability to create an overarching set of ideals for our nation (the constitution), and the option to have population-specific laws within that nation (states rights), and a population far more willing (at least in theory) to relocate to the the population-specific areas with the laws they support.
Now, having said all that, I can sympathize with a theoretical Spaniard wanting to remain a Spaniard first and a European second. But that's largely because I like the governing philosophy of Mirthlandia far better than Atlanta!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but for the longest time, people in the US thought of themselves as Americans second, and whichever State they were from first.
Also, I think the EU model is a lot more similiar to what the US looked like when it was first formed. Individual countries (States) coming together for the advantages of defense and commerce, ie no internal boarders, freedom to migrate, etc. The problem that the EU has, is that some of it's States, don't want to be fiscally sound. And the other member States don't wish to bail them out, without a lot of pain being taken by that State. The US could still face that problem. If one or more States fail and refuse to cut luxury programs, then others may refuse to help them. Wisconsin I think, dodged a bullet yesterday by reelecting Gov Walker. The people of that State said no, we cannot afford to return to the old way of doing business. Recent European elections seem to be doing the opposite.
Quote from: OJsDad on June 06, 2012, 08:21:07 PM
The problem that the EU has, is that some of it's States, don't want to be fiscally sound. And the other member States don't wish to bail them out, without a lot of pain being taken by that State. The US could still face that problem. If one or more States fail and refuse to cut luxury programs, then others may refuse to help them. Wisconsin I think, dodged a bullet yesterday by reelecting Gov Walker. The people of that State said no, we cannot afford to return to the old way of doing business. Recent European elections seem to be doing the opposite.
I'm not sure that US states going bankrupt would have the same effect as what is going on in the EU. The US Federal government could bail out a state far easier than the EU can bail out one of it's members. At the US Federal level there are powers of taxation and lending that don't exist on a centralized level for the EU. The EU seems to be more like the government the US once had under the Articles of Confederation which was doomed because it's almost non-existent powers of taxation.
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 08:19:16 PM
It will be a sugary drink, table salt laden, jumbo Mai Tai, incandescently lit paradise!
With bikini clad serving girls?
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 08:31:45 PM
Quote from: OJsDad on June 06, 2012, 08:21:07 PM
The problem that the EU has, is that some of it's States, don't want to be fiscally sound. And the other member States don't wish to bail them out, without a lot of pain being taken by that State. The US could still face that problem. If one or more States fail and refuse to cut luxury programs, then others may refuse to help them. Wisconsin I think, dodged a bullet yesterday by reelecting Gov Walker. The people of that State said no, we cannot afford to return to the old way of doing business. Recent European elections seem to be doing the opposite.
I'm not sure that US states going bankrupt would have the same effect as what is going on in the EU. The US Federal government could bail out a state far easier than the EU can bail out one of it's members. At the US Federal level there are powers of taxation and lending that don't exist on a centralized level for the EU. The EU seems to be more like the government the US once had under the Articles of Confederation which was doomed because it's almost non-existent powers of taxation.
It almost sounds like you're describing the Iroquois Confederation.
You also never had in the US states that spoke a dozen different languages, a protracted history of killing each other and centuries of established culture. The EU and the US are very different constructs.
Quote from: Bison on June 06, 2012, 08:59:07 PM
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 08:19:16 PM
It will be a sugary drink, table salt laden, jumbo Mai Tai, incandescently lit paradise!
With bikini clad serving girls?
There will be serving girls. The bikinis will be optional.
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 09:07:34 PM
Quote from: Bison on June 06, 2012, 08:59:07 PM
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 08:19:16 PM
It will be a sugary drink, table salt laden, jumbo Mai Tai, incandescently lit paradise!
With bikini clad serving girls?
There will be serving girls. The bikinis will be optional.
As long as the burka is not the alternative, I'm leaning toward joining up on this proposed utopian nation state.
Quote from: Bison on June 06, 2012, 09:10:33 PM
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 09:07:34 PM
Quote from: Bison on June 06, 2012, 08:59:07 PM
Quote from: mirth on June 06, 2012, 08:19:16 PM
It will be a sugary drink, table salt laden, jumbo Mai Tai, incandescently lit paradise!
With bikini clad serving girls?
There will be serving girls. The bikinis will be optional.
As long as the burka is not the alternative, I'm leaning toward joining up on this proposed utopian nation state.
Welcome, my brother!
Quote from: OJsDad on June 06, 2012, 08:21:07 PM
Quote from: meadbelly on June 06, 2012, 06:16:41 PM
The question of States Rights/Balkanization is going to be a unique answer for America.
No other country, democracy or otherwise, is composed of such diverse ethnicities and cultures. This has been a great strength of our nation, but it also comes with a cost. Some of that cost can be seen in the current culture wars (fwiw, I believe there are far more potent and direct causes of our culture war than culture or ethnic diversity). And it is entirely possible that a return to a more state-oriented government is going to be a better solution for coexistence than the federal system.
That sounds like a bit like the "goals" of balkanization -- i.e., reduce the size of the state to a more congenial majority, and therefore produce a better government for that smaller population. And if that has failed in Europe, we do have one huge mother of an advantage over the deliberately-referenced Old World. Ethnic and cultural groups in America do NOT have the same relationship with geography that an ethnic or cultural group has when the last 20 generations have grown up in the same geographic location. In other words, we have the ability to create an overarching set of ideals for our nation (the constitution), and the option to have population-specific laws within that nation (states rights), and a population far more willing (at least in theory) to relocate to the the population-specific areas with the laws they support.
Now, having said all that, I can sympathize with a theoretical Spaniard wanting to remain a Spaniard first and a European second. But that's largely because I like the governing philosophy of Mirthlandia far better than Atlanta!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but for the longest time, people in the US thought of themselves as Americans second, and whichever State they were from first.
Also, I think the EU model is a lot more similiar to what the US looked like when it was first formed. Individual countries (States) coming together for the advantages of defense and commerce, ie no internal boarders, freedom to migrate, etc. The problem that the EU has, is that some of it's States, don't want to be fiscally sound. And the other member States don't wish to bail them out, without a lot of pain being taken by that State. The US could still face that problem. If one or more States fail and refuse to cut luxury programs, then others may refuse to help them. Wisconsin I think, dodged a bullet yesterday by reelecting Gov Walker. The people of that State said no, we cannot afford to return to the old way of doing business. Recent European elections seem to be doing the oppos
I am sure there still are people who consider themselves, for example, Washingtonians first and Americans second. And that would unquestionably influence their willingness to relocate, which I assume is your point. It's impossible for you, me, or anyone other than these people to judge exactly how much more or less their identification with a state affects their willingness to relocate as opposed to europeans willing to locate. However, I'm going to stick with the new world vs the old world and believe there may be more reluctance to relocate in a family that has a 1000 years of history of living in the same region then families who have a ancestral willingness to get up and cross a freaking ocean to get a better life. But again, that's pure speculation.
I think linking states rights, balkanization, and fiscal policy is an even bigger jump into the theoretical and further separates the (potential) american experience with these three from other experiences. It is, for example, hard to imagine an american military with the budget and capability of today's without a federal budget that would be impossible in an America where states are financially independent of each other. And it's hard to imagine an america that is willing to surrender the most obvious and convenient assurances of our presumed superiority. That's the far more dangerous bullet that we need to dodge, in my opinion.
Europeans and Americans do share a common problem. Our populaces have demanded increasing services from our governments, to the point where those demands and promises far exceed balanced budgets. And Americans and Europeans share the same human phenomenon -- a willingness to let other suffer first before ourselves. Until we can think past our narrow self interests, we are not going to be solving our nationwide problems. Wisconsin may very well be a sign of willingness to accept responsibility and the consequences thereof across the political spectrum, but I fear it is little more than another wedge issue.
Kohr ? ...damned Commie anarchist >:(
...to sad the bullet with his name on it somehow missed him in Spanish civil war ::)
Quote from: OJsDad on June 06, 2012, 08:21:07 PMCorrect me if I'm wrong, but for the longest time, people in the US thought of themselves as Americans second, and whichever State they were from first.
you haven't spent enough time in the South.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on June 07, 2012, 05:31:55 AM
Quote from: OJsDad on June 06, 2012, 08:21:07 PMCorrect me if I'm wrong, but for the longest time, people in the US thought of themselves as Americans second, and whichever State they were from first.
you haven't spent enough time in the South.
Lol, are you speaking toward an occasional southern tradition to think of themselves as from their State first. . . and only?
I've heard that enough to believe it's not completely hype. :)
From the link:
But if the ideal state cannot be attained, at least it can be approached, Kohr thought, by reducing the scale of government. Which sounds a lot like the famous quote from Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience": "That government is best which governs least." But in Kohr's vision, smaller government should mean, first and foremost, a smaller area to govern. In such smallness, greatness resides. Counterintuitive as that may sound, didn't Greece and Italy have their Golden Ages when they were divided into countless city-states? Not a coincidence, according to Kohr: smaller states produce more culture, wealth and happiness.
The 10th Amendment was supposed to limit the size and authority of the Federal Government.