The demise of nations?

 You can look pretty hard and never find a perfect city. But if you ask the question, "which is better--a group of nations, or a group of city-states?", the answer might be the city-states. And, sea-steading, anyone?

Whether you agree or not, this is a thought-provoking essay...



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Southern universities lose talented applicants due to fears of pregnancy in a backwards state

Image
  My friend is inclined to not let her daughter apply to Vanderbilt, because of the risk she might get pregnant in Tennessee. Wow. This could hurt Duke, UT Austin, Washington University St Louis, Emory and other good southern schools as well. When I attended Vanderbilt, one of the best parts of it was meeting students from all over the country and the world. When we lose geographic diversity in our universities, we lose a lot. All because of idiocy and hatred in state legislatures. It's another form of a war against education. (photo credit: Shutterstock)
Read more

"Vastly Less Murderous"

Image
  From a great article on Aeon , arguing why a liberal democracy is the best form of government: "The cognitive scientist Steven Pinker contrasts liberal democracies with regimes based on demonising, concluding that: ‘democracies are vastly less murderous than alternative forms of government’. Like other modern writers, Pinker uses ‘democracy’ as shorthand for ‘liberal democracy’, meaning: popular sovereignty, rule of law, voting rights, human rights, free speech, equal opportunity, separation of church and state, distributive justice, and a market-based economy. Kenton: But it appears it is harder to maintain a democracy than to maintain a dictatorship. Being 'vastly less murderous' is good enough for me. Worth fighting for. And if we could ever actually obtain a semblance of 'justice for all,' well, that would be a bonus.
Read more

An Old Man Muses on our Recent Presidents

Image
  HW Bush (the father) had honorable military and CIA service, and was the last Republican who was intelligent, honorable, and competent, though I disagreed with many of his positions. Romney comes to mind as an intelligent, honorable man, though he lost. Then there were a pair of unsatisfactory Republicans: one an idiot and the other both an idiot and dishonest: younger Bush (who tormented us when we lived in TX; his greatest failure was starting unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which cost trillions and permanent brain injuries in thousands of American soldiers), and Trump, a narcissistic Facist who understands almost nothing except how to berate and antagonize others for personal gain. Most of the less-educated citizens now follow that party. The Democrats fare a little better. Clinton was a moral scuz but most of his positions were good for the country (except his excessive support of Big Business), and Clinton has the distinction of being the last President who oversaw...
Read more