Federalism, should we adopt it?

[Token]

What about the poor areas who can't get ahead? How will they fare under federalism?

Sent from my CHM-U01 using Tapatalk

They will become even poorer. Take Brazil as a example, look at the discrepancy between São Paulo and Maranhão.

[Joso]

They will become even poorer. Take Brazil as a example, look at the discrepancy between São Paulo and Maranhão.

Brazil is not a federalist country, despite what the name says. And no, these areas wouldn't became poorer. That doesn't makes sense.

[Phenix]

I prefer jacobinism.

Ça sent le croissant.

[Token]

Brazil is not a federalist country, despite what the name says. And no, these areas wouldn't became poorer. That doesn't makes sense.

Brazil is obviously a federalist country. Federalism is the union of states with relative independence in internal affairs under a single central government.

[Joso]

Brazil is obviously a federalist country. Federalism is the union of states with relative independence in internal affairs under a single central government.

Brazil is not a federalist country. If you think otherwise, show me a proof.
USA is a federalist Country.

[Turul Karom]

There is currently a debate in the Philippines over whether we should shift into a federal form of government or not...

What are the Pros and Cons of Federalism?

Personally, I believe that we are too ethnically diverse and federalism will just further fragment an already divided archipelago.

Personally, I believe that if we adopt federalism we might separate and return to our pre-colonial status as a bunch of warring port-kingdoms.

But on the other hand, the Unitarian Constitution that we had since independence has caused all development to focus on our capital, Manila, to the detriment of other regions...

When in fact, the south is just as populous as the north, but there are not enough investments there.

So, do you guys think that it would be better if we shift to a federal form of government or not?

Shifting to a federated government will cause so much ethnic strife that it could only be done organically via people willingly mixing the cultures over a long period of time, or very violently as a form of subjugation and extermination. A good barometer for this is, if one needs to ask about the problems of federation, and it is not self-evident that federation would be an obvious desirable choice (as if all the people saw themselves as united and this was not a power-grab) then it would have already happened.

The EU is going through the process of this exact same questioning, and it is obvious what the nations would truly lose if the EU was to become a single federated nation state.

Federalism is always good, it means freedom, the states/provincies will be more independent. Economic indepence also means individual independence

lol, what?

What about the poor areas who can't get ahead? How will they fare under federalism?

Sent from my CHM-U01 using Tapatalk

They will be turned into the dumping grounds for the other regions/ethnicities to pile their excess waste, in both human and material form, and forever taint their possible rise from stagnation while the federation remains in place.

Brazil is not a federalist country. If you think otherwise, show me a proof.
USA is a federalist Country.

I looked up the official name, which is "Federative Republic of Brazil/República Federativa do Brasil". It is composed of 26 states and one federal district.
It is a federation because it is composed of states, each state having its own government but each state reporting (regarding certain issues) to the federal government. Doesn't the USA work the same way? The EU is attempting to turn individual countries into states of local governments with Brussels in control.

[Joso]

I looked up the official name, which is "Federative Republic of Brazil/República Federativa do Brasil". It is composed of 26 states and one federal district.
It is a federation because it is composed of states, each state having its own government but each state reporting (regarding certain issues) to the federal government. Doesn't the USA work the same way? The EU is attempting to turn individual countries into states of local governments with Brussels in control.

The name of the country and the constituition means nothing. Just because something is assured by the constitucional, doesn't mean it will be put into practice. The government is not made by honest gods, it is made by corrupt humans, obviously. Brazil is not really a federalist counntry, because the centrsl government still is extremely powerful over the opressed states. All governments are extremely corrupt, without exception. So the less powerful a government is, the most efficient it is, because it will have less capacity of being corrupt. So federalism is good because it means freedom and less corrupttion as the states would be more free of a central government, só a central government would have less power over the states.

[Turul Karom]

The name of the country and the constituition means nothing. Just because something is assured by the constitucional, doesn't mean it will be put into practice. The government is not made by honest gods, it is made by corrupt humans, obviously. Brazil is not really a federalist counntry, because the centrsl government still is extremely powerful over the opressed states. All governments are extremely corrupt, without exception. So the less powerful a government is, the most efficient it is, because it will have less capacity of being corrupt. So federalism is good because it means freedom and less corrupttion as the states would be more free of a central government, só a central government would have less power over the states.

Are you sure you are not thinking of DE-federalization? It sounds like you are advocating for a "confederation" rather than a "federalization".

[Iloko]

From what I heard they will be following either the French or the German model, though I'm not totally sure

[Bobby Martnen]

A multitude of rulers is not a good thing. Let there be one ruler, one king.