- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 32,516
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Yes, I believe that is a core issue the Convention will need to address at some point in an official vote on the topic. My criticism was of the wording of the poll, not your explanation of it. Many likely agree with you. Many will not.
The challenge, of course, is in where is the fulcrum of the balance. I doubt anyone wants to abolish state and local government. Rather, it will be who is the final protector of individual, human and civil rights?
My own opinion? While local control sounds cozy, local government not only can be the most oppressive of all, it is the most easily bought and taken over too. The smaller the government body with the final authority, the more easily it is corrupted, co-opted, taken over and bought. That principle applies to states as well, and the question of states bidding against each other for business also could be a problem. But an all-powerful federal government then is a problem too. So the question in real terms comes down to where the divisions of power are placed.
For example, if a state decided to not allow women to vote, or that only property owners can vote, were to adopt intensely oppressive and selective laws etc, could the "union" even hold together? An example of state government mostly having power is the European Union. Would they REALLY stick together in a military situation? Are they really a collective?
Historically, countries without a strong federal/national authority tended to be militarily defeated, endless fighting amongst themselves, and little individual rights. Rather, they become a collective of little fiefdoms each with their own little tyrants and power brokers.
guy i think you need to do a lot more thinking, you seem to be fusing together a federal system, and an Confederacy......and the poll does not deal with the latter.