I think I lastly got what everyone is saying here. This is an argument of centralisation against decentralisation. Why everyone uses these weird words, no clue. Well, both centralisation and decentralisation are usually bad, with little difference, but decentralisation is just a bit better and freer, while makes the country weaker as a whole.

while makes the country weaker as a whole.

Again another generalization from you. Give some examples or an argument that leads to this conclusion.

Edited 2/7/2016 00:16:38

I like the Swiss system

Again another generalization from you. Give some examples or an argument that leads to this conclusion.

*Holy Roman Empire/German Confederation (after 1100s or so)

*Aleksandr II (made loads of radic reforms, many involving decentralisation, and was going to sign the order to make Russia a constitutional tsardom the day he was tragically killed, also, industrial input stagnated in his long reign (1855to1881)), against Aleksandr III (basically undid many things Aleksandr II, and industrialisation grew greatly)

*The end's beginning for Jugoslavija (having to dentralise some repubs)

*Iran's Qizilbash domination up until Abbās I fixed stuff

*Chinese Republic (when it was on the mainland)

Edited 2/7/2016 02:57:40

Cool you can write down a list of political groups or historical entities. So what? Give me an actual argument or statistics that prove decentralization creates weakness. Again, no anti-federalist is saying complete decentralization I hope you understand. We are talking about a system where states are equals to the federal government and not their slaves.

You're not giving any stats or arguments either, mind you, nor did you ask any from me. And you aught to curb your hostility here, or else I will begin to be hostile as well. Anyhow, the argument is that the subdivisions are less dependable, and are often not standardised (ex. timezones, China has 1, and no problems with time at the national level), so some inefficiency happens as well. They begin to move in different directions, instead of the one, and only one, that the core needs. It's the same with giving more freedom to the folk - they will snowball and want more and more freedom. I don't know what more you want, but what I want is for you to name 5 polities that did better when they were decentralised, and got less powerful when they were later centralised.

Edited 2/7/2016 05:42:40