3 ms·
Spot on with the too large / too small argument. I think the key point you allude to here is that there is nothing sacred about 50 states or their boundaries.
by gdudeman 10y ago
Spot on with the too large / too small argument.
I think the key point you allude to here is that there is nothing sacred about 50 states or their boundaries.
The article suggests exactly the parent's argument: decentralize power back to the states (and redraw the boundaries so the states make sense).
- ende 10y agoYou can't just 'redraw' state boundaries though. The core fallacy in this kind of thinking is that the existing political geography is all the result of some top-down design and thus subject to top-down revision. The 'United States' is more than just a name, it's a literal description. The US Federal Government is essentially a super-national body that is the product of a treaty process not too unlike that which we've more recently witnessed in the founding of the European Union. The vesting of partial sovereignty from the constituent states into the federal state does not negate the sovereignty that is retained by the constituent states. They are not mere administrative divisions subject to the redistricting whims of some legislative body.