A confederacy is constantly on the brink of collapse. You have potentially dozens of different governments feuding with each other over anything and everything, with a national government that's no more than a figurehead with an excessive salary.
No, as long as the unitarian govt has an elected legislature that problem's solved.
There's an inherent risk of totalitarianism in every form of govt, from anarchy to democracy. The only thing that changes is who gets to be the dictator.
Legislatures don't prevent military take overs, in a confederal system the military is extremely well funded except in times of war, so the central gov never gains major power.
Legislatures provide a voice for the people, that's what I was referring to.
IMO multiple govts would actually make it easier to have a military takeover. No unified response. Governments don't play nice with each other, as a rule.
I would rather have the actual ability to make change then just a voice. I guess that's what differs between us. And I believe states wouldn't allow a central force strip the power from them.
Not always, people for instance from New York won't want to direct funds to wv for their local improvement. While in a confederal system, the state or local community has direct power to use their own funds to operate projects.
Comments: Add Comment