Here’s the thing, folks: even Lincoln had doubts about manifest destiny and the governing challenges it would present.
What if, hear me out, America is too vast and different to ever be cohesive? What if the best path to success is avoiding shitty cultures that devalue the things you value?
Why are we so bent on homogeneous outcomes? I found my oasis, and I’m building something that will live longer than me. What about you? Is your city/state representative of your values? If not, what’s your migration plan? You have one, right?
Are you seriously arguing that racists should be allowed their own territory? I agree, if only for us to bomb them out of existence immediately upon founding.
I think this logic is accelerationist, and we need to try and preserve and improve the country as we have it. We could actually reform representation, the electoral college, etc.
Prager U does not represent all Republicans. It just represents one asshole with money who wants to ruin the country.
Administrative Attrition is what I call it. It’s real. China and India know it well. It is why tyrants and fascists will always fail. They cannot grasp that it is impossible to maintain order when the population out scales the administrative control. Which it has.
With the latest and greatest EU threaty driving for ever closer political, legal and fiscal union, which was the whole point of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU could have made the same mistake. Not only did this terrible idea start the calls for Brexit, it may well reduce further membership growth.
Edit This is not a pro Brexit statement and I don’t understand the downvotes. I stated that the Lisbon Threaty was a terrible idea and I’m making the point that it caused another terrible thing. The history is well documented. Blair made an election promise for a referendum on Lisbon. When he saw the way the referendum would go, he abandoned the idea and signed Lisbon anyway. Cameron, in the opposition, therefore, made an election promise on membership, and he won the General election and a change from Labour to Conservative government. He followed through with the referendum, very confident he would win the remain vote. Johnson lied his ass off and convinced enough people to win the leave vote. My only fucking point is that I agree with the poster I am replying to and here’s another example of trying to take homogeneous union too fucking far.
My comment is a reflection on the somewhat fragile nature of the USA as a single federal nation, as alluded to in the comment I was replying to, and how the EU is driving well beyond what has been tried there - for example fiscal union is not a goal in the US. People can downvote me all they want, but it is not a pro Brexit statement. It’s very rare for people outside the US to understand the very strongly independence each individual state is, with limited fiscal and political union. Unfortunately the Lisbon Threaty has set the EU on a path of ultimate destruction, which will happen whether you downvote me or not 🤷♂️
Here’s the thing, folks: even Lincoln had doubts about manifest destiny and the governing challenges it would present.
What if, hear me out, America is too vast and different to ever be cohesive? What if the best path to success is avoiding shitty cultures that devalue the things you value?
Why are we so bent on homogeneous outcomes? I found my oasis, and I’m building something that will live longer than me. What about you? Is your city/state representative of your values? If not, what’s your migration plan? You have one, right?
Are you seriously arguing that racists should be allowed their own territory? I agree, if only for us to bomb them out of existence immediately upon founding.
I think this logic is accelerationist, and we need to try and preserve and improve the country as we have it. We could actually reform representation, the electoral college, etc.
Prager U does not represent all Republicans. It just represents one asshole with money who wants to ruin the country.
Administrative Attrition is what I call it. It’s real. China and India know it well. It is why tyrants and fascists will always fail. They cannot grasp that it is impossible to maintain order when the population out scales the administrative control. Which it has.
With the latest and greatest EU threaty driving for ever closer political, legal and fiscal union, which was the whole point of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU could have made the same mistake. Not only did this terrible idea start the calls for Brexit, it may well reduce further membership growth.
Edit This is not a pro Brexit statement and I don’t understand the downvotes. I stated that the Lisbon Threaty was a terrible idea and I’m making the point that it caused another terrible thing. The history is well documented. Blair made an election promise for a referendum on Lisbon. When he saw the way the referendum would go, he abandoned the idea and signed Lisbon anyway. Cameron, in the opposition, therefore, made an election promise on membership, and he won the General election and a change from Labour to Conservative government. He followed through with the referendum, very confident he would win the remain vote. Johnson lied his ass off and convinced enough people to win the leave vote. My only fucking point is that I agree with the poster I am replying to and here’s another example of trying to take homogeneous union too fucking far.
deleted by creator
My comment is a reflection on the somewhat fragile nature of the USA as a single federal nation, as alluded to in the comment I was replying to, and how the EU is driving well beyond what has been tried there - for example fiscal union is not a goal in the US. People can downvote me all they want, but it is not a pro Brexit statement. It’s very rare for people outside the US to understand the very strongly independence each individual state is, with limited fiscal and political union. Unfortunately the Lisbon Threaty has set the EU on a path of ultimate destruction, which will happen whether you downvote me or not 🤷♂️