The more I think about things, and how well stuff works in other countries, i believe it’s due to the sheer size and demographic makeup of the country. I often times wonder if it would be better managed with more of an EU style system where certain standards are core across all states and then leave each country to truly govern themselves.
I’m fairly certain this was the original goal when the country was founded and the idea of states rights, but at some it feels like things got flipped on their heads.
(Note, this is probably more of a rant and I know there are definitely things that would not work as well in that situation, but part of me wonders if it’d be a better solution than what we’re stuck with right now)
first get russia to turn into 46 oblasts.
I’ll wait.
I’ll never get the obsession with “Country should be Lots of Countries”, as though balkinization has ever improved the politics or the stability of a region. The Ottoman Empire was a shit region run by shit people, and yet its dissolution only seems to have immiserated the next four generations.
What on earth does anyone think an independent Florida or Volgograd does to improve the current situation? FFS, the issue of nuclear proliferation alone…
Especially that the current US state borders are drawn rather poorly. There are few states that could operate independently. There would immediately be water wars out west and political consolidation in the east. The Mississippi River watershed would require some form of international treaty to handle its trade and use.
And there is a sizeable amount of federalization in the USA. The government of California is not run like the government of West Virginia.
Obviously, the solution is to turn California into 50 Californias