random thought #2
our system of government, well-suited for the eighteenth century, can no longer function under the weight of demographic, technological, and relative income distribution changes.
this is an interesting one for me that i’ve been pondering for a while. basically, i think the US is too large, too diverse, and too scattered for our federal system to function well. my hypothesis is that as our world expands (due primarily to communications advances), our natural reaction in trying to make sense of the overwhelming amount of information and change inundating us is to turn inward — to state or local politics, interest groups (religious or not), etc.
we’ve become more insular, less tolerant, and terrified of anything that might shake our foundational beliefs.
April 19th, 2005 at 8:19 pm
Or maybe all that increased communication capability has cast a light on the insular, intolerant, and terrified folks that heretofore had no exposure or voice. Maybe its the job of the government to use its increased commo to spread a welcoming, tolerant, and pleasing message. MLK, Gandhi, Jesus, Muhammad, and Moses did it on foot, Buddha just sat under a tree right. Maybe Bush and Cheney could use the weekly radio address to spread a message of tolerance, inclusion, and peace. That’ll be the day….who used it first? The Duke in The Searchers or Buddy Holly?
April 20th, 2005 at 4:12 am
I like to say that the U.S. is too big and that it’d be better for everyone if it broke up into smaller countries.
But hasn’t progress of technology effectively made the country smaller, through improved communication and faster travel?
Have TV, large national corporations, and population mobility not made the U.S. more homogenous?
Would it be equally good to devolve much of the federal programs to the states?