you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Breaking up the country means dooming tons of people in states that rely on federal assistance (ie, southern states where marginalized people already suffer more). If we want to rethink/reorganize/retool the federal government, I'm on board. But dissolving it completely would be disastrous

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    That may be true, but I think you are assuming that there is an easy way out. What if there isn't? What if the interests of the ultra wealthy have infested our government to the point where it serves only them and will defend their positions of power at all cost? We would be talking violent revolt if we wanted to better our situation anyway. In order to prevent the same situation from quickly redeveloping, we might want to break up the country into more manageable territories. The larger the group, the more difficult it is to reach consensus. You are right that some would be better off than others. That is true now though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    No, it's not just that some would be better off than others. There would be entire states that would be destitute without the federal government. Multiple states receive more in federal aid/grants/etc. than what their people pay in taxes. Removing the federal government would instantly throw them into bankruptcy. There would be famines.

    I'm not assuming there's an easy way out. Fixing the federal government will be one of the hardest projects in the country's history. But dissolving it won't fix anything, and it surely won't make revolution any easier. Kinda hard to revolt when you're dying of hunger.

  • source
  • parent