4 ms·

Because the American states have a tradition of autonomy that dates back far before the Revolution. That is why American states are states with their own citize

Because the American states have a tradition of autonomy that dates back far before the Revolution. That is why American states are states with their own citizens (think drivers licenses) and not simply administrative regions as they would be in other large and diverse countries like China and Russia.

Chathamization 10y ago
I don't know about the Russian system, but the Chinese system is much closer to individuals being citizens of different regions than the U.S. system. Residency in the U.S. is simple to change and unrestricted, and most effects are immediate (though some in-state tuition requirements can take longer). In contrast, in China it is difficult for rural workers to change their Hukou, and as such they are often stuck with major disadvantages even after they move. A rural worker in Shanghai might live as a second class citizen there for years, because they're not considered to be officially Shanghainese. This isn't the case in the U.S.
- int_19h 10y ago
  But is the registration system in China managed separately by different provinces because they want to control and/or prevent migration, or by the national government because it wants to control migration? If it's the latter, it's not a sign of federalism - quite the opposite, in fact.
int_19h 10y ago
Russian system is more complicated than that - the "federal subjects", as the regions are known, are not merely administrative, but have some actual powers. They may have regional laws (although criminal law belongs on the federal level), may collect taxes, set their own system of local government (how the regional parliament looks etc). They can also have other languages designated as official on their territory, in addition to Russian, and implement an educational system that teaches those languages. They have their own constitutions, enforced by regional constitutional courts. One particularly curious case is that of Tatarstan. It nearly declared independence in 1990 (some argue that it actually did - it made a "declaration of sovereignty": http://1997-2011.tatarstan.ru/english/00002028.html http://1997-2011.tatarstan.ru/english/00002028.html). In 1992, it adopted its own constitution on a referendum, which also described it as a "sovereign state". Then, intense negotiations with the Russian federal government followed, which resulted in an 1994 agreement (https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://faolex.fao.org/docs/texts/rus32708.doc https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://fao...) with an unwieldy title of "On Delimitation of Jurisdictional Subjects and Mutual Delegation of Powers between Bodies of Public Authority of the Russian Federation and Bodies of Public Authority of the Republic of Tatarstan". The constitution of Tatarstan was then amended with a curious definition of the federal arrangement as follows: "The Republic of Tatarstan is a democratic constitutional State associated with the Russian Federation" i.e. not a "member of" - although according to the federal constitution, it is a federal subject, same as any other. It also has some other special guarantees - for example, its borders cannot be changed without its consent. And the whole arrangement can only be amended by mutual agreement. Of course, given the present state of affairs in Russia, it is unclear to what extent any of these theoretical political powers that federal subjects may enjoy are actually realized.

Chathamization 10y ago

I don't know about the Russian system, but the Chinese system is much closer to individuals being citizens of different regions than the U.S. system. Residency in the U.S. is simple to change and unrestricted, and most effects are immediate (though some in-state tuition requirements can take longer). In contrast, in China it is difficult for rural workers to change their Hukou, and as such they are often stuck with major disadvantages even after they move. A rural worker in Shanghai might live as a second class citizen there for years, because they're not considered to be officially Shanghainese. This isn't the case in the U.S.

int_19h 10y ago
But is the registration system in China managed separately by different provinces because they want to control and/or prevent migration, or by the national government because it wants to control migration? If it's the latter, it's not a sign of federalism - quite the opposite, in fact.

int_19h 10y ago

Russian system is more complicated than that - the "federal subjects", as the regions are known, are not merely administrative, but have some actual powers. They may have regional laws (although criminal law belongs on the federal level), may collect taxes, set their own system of local government (how the regional parliament looks etc). They can also have other languages designated as official on their territory, in addition to Russian, and implement an educational system that teaches those languages. They have their own constitutions, enforced by regional constitutional courts. One particularly curious case is that of Tatarstan. It nearly declared independence in 1990 (some argue that it actually did - it made a "declaration of sovereignty": http://1997-2011.tatarstan.ru/english/00002028.html http://1997-2011.tatarstan.ru/english/00002028.html). In 1992, it adopted its own constitution on a referendum, which also described it as a "sovereign state". Then, intense negotiations with the Russian federal government followed, which resulted in an 1994 agreement (https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://faolex.fao.org/docs/texts/rus32708.doc https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://fao...) with an unwieldy title of "On Delimitation of Jurisdictional Subjects and Mutual Delegation of Powers between Bodies of Public Authority of the Russian Federation and Bodies of Public Authority of the Republic of Tatarstan". The constitution of Tatarstan was then amended with a curious definition of the federal arrangement as follows: "The Republic of Tatarstan is a democratic constitutional State associated with the Russian Federation" i.e. not a "member of" - although according to the federal constitution, it is a federal subject, same as any other. It also has some other special guarantees - for example, its borders cannot be changed without its consent. And the whole arrangement can only be amended by mutual agreement. Of course, given the present state of affairs in Russia, it is unclear to what extent any of these theoretical political powers that federal subjects may enjoy are actually realized.