What's the point of decentralized government anyway?

[pecksniff]

I've been entirely intellectually honest, especially about the efficacy of your Marxist beliefs.

But you can never come up with anything better than Marxism. The whole RW seems to have lost any positive goals of its own, now that nobody believes any more that still more deregulation and tax-cutting will bring Morning in America or that "traditional values" are worth preserving or reviving. Obstruction of Dems and liberals and leftists is all you have left -- and you don't do it honestly.

 

[Rightguide]

But Chinese government was just as centralized under the emperors.

Yes but Communism has eroded the technological evolution of the Chinese people. When you talk about quality controls, construction standards, production standards, engineering standards, regulatory standards, keep in mind they either don't exist in China or nobody is held to them. If they want something important to be done right they bring in foreign engineers and in some case skilled labor as well.

Many Chinese construction companies are corrupt. You'll find steel rebar that snaps if struck on the ground, rebar made from fiberglass to look like iron, cheap red building bricks that are red on the outside and asphalt on the inside, that can be broken with your hands. You'll see plaster over the top of cardboard on the outside of buildings. You can dig though it with your fingernails. In Japan it is 100% the opposite, strict building codes and engineering standards. It's simply inexplicable what is happening in China.

 

[Rightguide]

But you can never come up with anything better than Marxism. The whole RW seems to have lost any positive goals of its own, now that nobody believes any more that still more deregulation and tax-cutting will bring Morning in America or that "traditional values" are worth preserving or reviving. Obstruction of Dems and liberals and leftists is all you have left -- and you don't do it honestly.

And you cannot come up with an iota of evidence that is true.

 

[pecksniff]

And you cannot come up with an iota of evidence that is true.

Your posts are the evidence. You never have any new ideas, and your simple defense of the status quo anywhere is never convincing or honest.

 

[OldJourno]

I was once astonished, at an SF convention panel discussion, to hear the late Jerry Pournelle insist that the U.S. is no longer a "republic" because of expanded federal powers and functions.

France has a unitary system of government. Germany has a federal system. France is just as good a republic.

I notice that the states'-rights RWs are as ready as anyone else to embrace centralized government when it serves their purposes -- see the ongoing effort in Georgia to give the state more power over the local elections offices. Reminds one of the antebellum South, where the slaveowning-landowning gentry centralized as much power as possible at the state level because it was easier for their class to control the state governments than all the towns and counties.

Commentator Michael Lind, a "democratic nationalist," with much experience with government at various levels, has formulated "Lind's Law": The lower you go in the federal-state-local hierarchy, the worse the ignorance and incompetence.

Why don't we go back to your thread title?
First and foremost, the very idea that what is good for New York is good for Montana is absurd. Perhaps you haven't thought of this. No, you haven't.
This was made abundantly clear to me a number of times as a reporter out West, when local politicians and governments clashed with one-size-fits-all policies.
Landfills are a prime example. Landfill policy where the water table is 10 feet was one of those policies. It threatened to choke one small Wyoming city to death with red tape when I moved on to Nevada, where a few years later the same rules were in place where the water table was 500 feet below the landfill.
That's just one example. Land use issues, speed limits, water pressure on shower heads - does the federal government need to stick its fucking nose into everything?
No.

 

[pecksniff]

Why don't we go back to your thread title?
First and foremost, the very idea that what is good for New York is good for Montana is absurd. Perhaps you haven't thought of this. No, you haven't.
This was made abundantly clear to me a number of times as a reporter out West, when local politicians and governments clashed with one-size-fits-all policies.
Landfills are a prime example. Landfill policy where the water table is 10 feet was one of those policies. It threatened to choke one small Wyoming city to death with red tape when I moved on to Nevada, where a few years later the same rules were in place where the water table was 500 feet below the landfill.
That's just one example. Land use issues, speed limits, water pressure on shower heads - does the federal government need to stick its fucking nose into everything?
No.

That's a practical argument for decentralization. At least it's refreshing to elevate the debate above concepts like "states' rights" presented as matters of principle, or concepts that value local diversity as an end in itself, which it ain't.

 

[CornusKousa]

That's a practical argument for decentralization. At least it's refreshing to elevate the debate above concepts like "states' rights" presented as matters of principle, or concepts that value local diversity as an end in itself, which it ain't.

He literally gave you a, if not the primary, 'states rights' argument....LOL

First and foremost, the very idea that what is good for New York is good for Montana is absurd.

 

[Rightguide]

Your posts are the evidence. You never have any new ideas, and your simple defense of the status quo anywhere is never convincing or honest.

The only "new" ideas you come up with is the same tired old Marxism and it's history of absolute failure.

 

[WillJ8787]

That's a practical argument for decentralization. At least it's refreshing to elevate the debate above concepts like "states' rights" presented as matters of principle, or concepts that value local diversity as an end in itself, which it ain't.

Yep, at least he/she uses examples of what practical matters could be State matters.

Issues with ground water, water supply and contamination are always going to be the purview of the Federal Govt. for oversight due to the nature of the resource and it's importance to the entire country.

General Elections also qualify... especially with the history some States have with voter disenfranchisement along racial and ethnic lines(historically and into the future as we see the same old same old reappear it's systemic racist head)

 

[CornusKousa]

Yep, at least he/she uses examples of what practical matters could be State matters.

Issues with ground water, water supply and contamination are always going to be the purview of the Federal Govt. for oversight due to the nature of the resource and it's importance to the entire country.

General Elections also qualify... especially with the history some States have with voter disenfranchisement along racial and ethnic lines(historically and into the future as we see the same old same old reappear it's systemic racist head)

No, they don't.

 

[Rightguide]

No, they don't.

Friggin' ignorant, aren't they?

 

[CornusKousa]

Friggin' ignorant, aren't they?

They're just pushing their authoritarian and totalitarian trash.....same as ever.

 

[pecksniff]

The only "new" ideas you come up with is the same tired old Marxism and it's history of absolute failure.

I'm in better touch with reality than you. You deny the obvious transformation in both the ideologies and the constituencies in the major parties since the 1950s. You seem to believe or wish to pretend the Deep State actually exists.

And, I'm really no more a Marxist than you are. Neither is Bernie. Socialist =/= Marxist. Marxism is always tempting to a leftist because it tells you time is on your side, but few can take it seriously any more. What new political movements or rebellions even call themselves Marxist nowadays?

 

[pecksniff]

No, they don't.

When we passed the Voting Rights Act of 1966, we established that state control of elections is not unlimited and not beyond federal control.

That was a long time ago and you should be used to it by now.

 

[Sean Renaud]

In theory a decentralized government means that any given part can make decisions on its own. They are supposed to be swift in their responses to crisis. This was probably true in the early days. If something was jumping off in Georgia you didn't have time for riders to tell the president the situation yadda yadda yadda.

Today it serves the Right in that there is NO truly central power so nothing can really get done. When every body can shut you down for months or years and then tell the people that the government cannot get anything done its a great system. As long as we self sabotauge we'll never get an education system on par with the rest of the world.

 

[pecksniff]

As long as we self sabotauge we'll never get an education system on par with the rest of the world.

If we look around the world at all the countries with educational systems generally acknowledged to be producing better results than ours, one thing they all have in common is national control of the system.

 

[Sean Renaud]

If we look around the world at all the countries with educational systems generally acknowledged to be producing better results than ours, one thing they all have in common is national control of the system.

Of course. The more moving parts you add to a system the more inefficient it is. We should thank our lucky stars that A-F are basically agreed upon the the fact that people like my sister have a had 4.+ GPAs shows what happens when you don't just set solid laws. A super perfect score should be impossible.

 

[WillJ8787]

No, they don't.

Yes, they do and you and Wrongwayturd know it but play games to convince folks otherwise.

Source: https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=100

The Voting Rights Act if 1965.....Southern States mostly used discriminatory.oractices to disenfranchise black and ethnic citizens of this Country (system racism discrimination).

This is established and factual US History, based on case law. When States cannot represent all of their citizens fairly.and without discrimination, the role of the Fed. Govt is to step in a compel(force) them to comply. Hallelujah!

If the States could do this for themselves then I would have no problem. So, Bobo and Wrongturd, please argue for your racist side and how State should get to do what ever they want...I wanna see you make this argument! Pretty Please!!

Since much of the removal of the 1965 voting rights act we have seen these very same systemically racist States go right back to voter disenfranchisement and get ready for what will be coming again....a reimplantation of Federal control because you racists can't help but be who you are....so you will be forced to comply once again.

 

[CornusKousa]

When we passed the Voting Rights Act of 1966,

Yes, they do

The Voting Rights Act if 1965...

The feds grossly overstepped their authority.....as is the norm.

 

[pecksniff]

The feds grossly overstepped their authority.....as is the norm.

That's the courts' call.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Nuh uh! Nuh uh! Nuh uh!

^^^^Quality rebuttal from teh welfare recipient demographic. Will projection/ascription rants follow?

 

[CornusKousa]

^^^^Quality rebuttal from teh welfare recipient demographic. Will projection/ascription rants follow?

More ascription, more lies.

I've never received a penny in welfare Rob.

 

[CornusKousa]

That's the courts' call.

Joe Biden and Blue states can give the courts the finger for pretty much whatever they want.

Red states are doing it for guns, free speech and to protect their schools from Democrats and their racist bullshit.

I don't see why states can't give the feds and the courts the finger on this too.

 

[pecksniff]

Joe Biden and Blue states can give the courts the finger for pretty much whatever they want.

Red states are doing it for guns, free speech and to protect their schools from Democrats and their racist bullshit.

I don't see why states can't give the feds and the courts the finger on this too.

Try it and you'll find out why.

 

[CornusKousa]

Try it and you'll find out why.

Nothing......just like with all the other stuff.

We're going to tell you guys to eat a fuckin dick and have a nice day pounding sand.

And you're going to say "THAT'S RACIST!!" and we'll laugh at you and that's pretty much going to be it.