What's the point of decentralized government anyway?

[pecksniff]

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.

 

[CornusKousa]

To keep control freaks like you from getting too much power.

 

[pecksniff]

To keep control freaks like you from getting too much power.

That hasn't caused the centralized states to do things any worse, in general, than in the federal ones.

 

[CornusKousa]

That hasn't caused the centralized states to do things any worse, in general, than in the federal ones.

Oh yea if you just ignore most of history and the current state of affairs in the world.....no problems with centralized authority.

 

[pecksniff]

Oh yea if you just ignore most of history and the current state of affairs in the world.....no problems with centralized authority.

The centralized authorities that are dysfunctional are dictatorships. Democracies do just fine with it.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Local knowledge in distributed systems is superior to centralized decision-making. It more accurately reflects the values, wishes and customs of the people it serves. Distant, aloof bureaucracies lose touch with those they serve and become self-referential and corrupt. Better to have the throats one needs to choke close by.

 

[pecksniff]

Local knowledge in distributed systems is superior to centralized decision-making. It more accurately reflects the values, wishes and customs of the people it serves. Distant, aloof bureaucracies lose touch with those they serve and become self-referential and corrupt. Better to have the throats one needs to choke close by.

OTOH, centralization always has the advantage of greater efficiency.

 

[CornusKousa]

The centralized authorities that are dysfunctional are dictatorships. Democracies do just fine with it.

No, they don't, they can become dysfunctional dictatorships just the same..... Venezuela for the most recent example, and again, history is littered with other examples reaching all the way back to ancient Greece.

Democracy isn't enough in and of itself to stop evil dictators from happening.

You have to make sure no one person or body of people has total power.

Thus we have decentralization on many levels on top of all the democracy that is also tempered and put in check in many ways, such as the existence of states, the EC, Senate and bicameral congress.

 

[pecksniff]

No, they don't, they can become dysfunctional dictatorships just the same..... Venezuela for the most recent example, and again, history is littered with other examples reaching all the way back to ancient Greece.

History is not littered with examples of federal government. Switzerland and the Holy Roman Empire are just about the only pre-modern examples.

 

[CornusKousa]

History is not littered with examples of federal government.

I didn't say it was.

We were talking about Democracies gone dysfunctional....and history IS littered with examples of that.

 

[Rightguide]

A republican form of government. A system of federalism that keeps governmental power closer to the people, where it belongs.

 

[pecksniff]

A republican form of government. A system of federalism that keeps governmental power closer to the people, where it belongs.

That is a description, not an argument.

 

[pecksniff]

I didn't say it was.

We were talking about Democracies gone dysfunctional....and history IS littered with examples of that.

But not in such a way as to demonstrate the superior democratic stability of federal systems over unitary.

The most vigorous assertion of state autonomy in our own history was in 1861, and the resulting Confederacy was no model of democratic or republican government worth imitating, not even with respect to white people.

 

[Rightguide]

That is a description, not an argument.

No that is the "point," or the reason why we don't have a centralized government. The "point" of decentralized government is to prevent centralized government.

 

[pecksniff]

No that is the "point," or the reason why we don't have a centralized government. The "point" of decentralized government is to prevent centralized government.

That does nothing to demonstrate that centralized government is not better.

 

[Rightguide]

That does nothing to demonstrate that centralized government is not better.

It's been demonstrated for over 230 years. No other type of government in history has reached the pinnacles this one has.

 

[pecksniff]

It's been demonstrated for over 230 years. No other type of government in history has reached the pinnacles this one has.

Allowing for changes over time in technology and resources, the French and the British and the Chinese did reach equivalent pinnacles, with centralized governments.

 

[pecksniff]

Speaking of the Chinese, the Judge Dee novels of Robert van Gulik give an interesting literary portrait of government in Imperial China. Dee qualifies for his position by performance on civil service exams. He is appointed to particular posts by officials in the capital. In most of the stories he is the "magistrate" of a county, meaning both judge and mayor -- the only other official of importance in the county being the officer in command of the local army garrison (every county seat has a garrison). After a year or two he is always rotated to another county, to prevent any magistrate from building up a local power base.

Certainly not a republican system, but not a bad way to organize a monarchical one.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

OTOH, centralization always has the advantage of greater efficiency.

Centralized decision-making is less efficient because it invariably fails to address the actual problem for lack of full knowledge, It solves the wrong problem, IOW. It also tends to get bound up in a lot of rules and procedure that are superfluous.

 

[bellisarius]

Mmmmm, to keep the nation from coming apart at the seams...........again. Like the former Soviet Union, the former Yugoslavia, the way Scotland is toying with leaving the UK, or the way France is coming apart as well (although France has managed to keep a clamp on that so far). The only thing holding China together is the iron booted totalitarian dictatorship it's under.

You cannot administer a nation as diverse as the US from a centralized 'top down' government. The democrats know this but are trying to shove their agenda down everyone else's throats. Several States are already in a state of rebellion, albeit a legal rebellion so far.

 

[WillJ8787]

To keep control freaks like you from getting too much power.

Yes, this is Peck's point...you are totally fine if someone does it when is corresponds to your beliefs, and when it doesn't.they are control freak Dems, even if they are Repubs...you then mislabel them swampy or turncoat Dems.

 

[pecksniff]

Mmmmm, to keep the nation from coming apart at the seams...........again. Like the former Soviet Union, the former Yugoslavia . . .

Considering what came after, those are actually examples of the superior value of centralized government.

 

[WillJ8787]

It's been demonstrated for over 230 years. No other type of government in history has reached the pinnacles this one has.

You have conflated.all those years into one monolithic idea that only exists in your pea sized brain....this Country isn't monolithic, never was, never will be.

 

[pecksniff]

Centralized decision-making is less efficient because it invariably fails to address the actual problem for lack of full knowledge, It solves the wrong problem, IOW. It also tends to get bound up in a lot of rules and procedure that are superfluous.

Local governments often show the same flaws.

 

[WillJ8787]

Considering what came after, those are actually examples of the superior value of centralized government.

Again, 100% correct....what came after was "civil war" and ethnic cleansing. People being shot out buying bread and having to run for cover to get bare essentials.

No American has the stomach for this type of insanity.