SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: nihil who wrote (49126)10/19/2000 12:15:43 PM
From: Neocon  Respond to of 769670
 
Sure, some matters must be kicked upstairs. On the other hand, "regional authorities" established as proxies for state governments working in tandem have often been effective, and I understand that the concept has been used effectively in coordinating activities among provinces that cross international boundaries in Europe. Similarly, NATO, an alliance structure, is more effective than the UN at responding to conflict and keeping the peace. It is not necessary to have over-arching governments do the coordinating, and cooperative structures created to handle limited assignments are frequently preferable to broader authorities. In any event, the idea of decentralization means two things, primarily: one, that one tailors solutions as much as possible to the actual situation on the ground, instead of "buying off the rack"; and, two, that even in over- arching structures, the center allows substantial autonomy to constituent parts to implement goals, while setting broad goals, coordinating assignments, and establishing accountability.



To: nihil who wrote (49126)10/19/2000 12:42:56 PM
From: Selectric II  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
"World government" hasn't been required to control conflict between nations in the past. The inevitable conflicts and terrorism resulting from instituting "world government" probably would itself result in a "World Civil War." jmho