Are Small and Homogeneous States More Prosperous?

[nang2]

I was not talking about individuals and Quakers. The founding fathers and the mainstream position in American society were for slavery. For example, Thomas Jefferson owned over 600 slaves and he was one of the authors of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 which states that all men are created equal. They meant all white men. American women didn't get the right to vote till just 100 years ago.

Yet you are talking about individuals, those founding fathers.

As of women's right to vote, this is a part of overall universal suffrage movement, which is the result of government progressive encroachment into everyone's life. If a government only concerns itself with protecting people's life, liberty and properties, we don't need so many to vote. A democracy that only allows 40+-year-old men to vote would have been more than sufficient. It is only when the government neglects the duty to protect women's life, liberty and properties, women need their voices to be heard.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

Yet you are talking about individuals, those founding fathers.

The founding fathers reflected mainstream American position of their time. But they had the right fundamental idea to expand upon, that all men are created equal.

 

[nang2]

The founding fathers reflected mainstream American position of their time. But they had the right fundamental idea to expand upon, that all men are created equal.

Here, all men means all men, including blacks. Founding fathers knew that slavery is at odds with liberty. That is why nowhere in the Constitution that slavery is endorsed. But not having explicitly banned slavery was a political compromise because they needed sufficient backing from 13 colonies. It was a political move of kicking the can down the road, which they eventually had to deal with in 1860.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

Here, all men means all men, including blacks. Founding fathers knew that slavery is at odds with liberty. That is why nowhere in the Constitution that slavery is endorsed. But not having explicitly banned slavery was a political compromise because they needed sufficient backing from 13 colonies. It was a political move of kicking the can down the road, which they eventually had to deal with in 1860.

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton owned slaves. They would not accept equality in their day. But they were visionaries and framed the language to create equality in the future. Being visionary leaders they would have an eye looking to the future.

 

[nang2]

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton owned slaves. They would not accept equality in their day. But they were visionaries and framed the language to create equality in the future. Being visionary leaders they would have an eye looking to the future.

That is very wise of them. They created a wonderful blueprint for future America while being still practical with the reality on the ground. America's later success owes a lot to them.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

That is very wise of them. They created a wonderful blueprint for future America while being still practical with the reality on the ground. America's later success owes a lot to them.

I agree. The Declaration of Independence is one of the greatest documents in history.

 

[Amaa'n]

Are small and ethnically homogenous states more prosperous as compared to large and diverse states? By prosperity, I mean lower crime rate, less internal tensions, more accountability of leaders and so on.

I have seen lot of people proposing solution of the Kashmir problem and thinking that peace can be achieved after its solution. In my opinion, the only lasting solution for South Asia is balkanization of India and possibly Pakistan into smaller states. This will allow local accountability of each region while denying the corrupt to use ethnic card. This will also eliminate or reduce the threat of spoilers and possibly an EU like organization can emerge.

Feel free to share your opinion on this.

Note that the two nation theory still holds in this case as well:

"That geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be constituted, with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as in the North Western and Eastern Zones of (British) India should be grouped to constitute 'independent states' in which the constituent units should be autonomous and sovereign. "

This is why concept of smaller administration units or municipality for the purpose of administration exist in Public administration so you don't end up breaking a 'State' into tiny little autonomous 'independent states'

above post of yours make no sense at all....how will these independent states maintain Defence & security?

How will they ensure food security?

 

[Pappa Alpha]

This is why concept of smaller administration units or municipality for the purpose of administration exist in Public administration so you don't end up breaking a 'State' into tiny little autonomous 'independent states'

above post of yours make no sense at all....how will these independent states maintain Defence & security?

How will they ensure food security?

every state would have something to trade.

 

[Abu Dhabi]

They can be, UAE is a good example.

Barely 10 million people, very safe, very rich, very stable.

 

[magra]

They can be, UAE is a good example.

Barely 10 million people, very safe, very rich, very stable.

Gulf states have been rich only in the last 100 years, after the discovery of oil. Not a good example for other countries not rich in oil.

 

[Abu Dhabi]

Gulf states have been rich only in the last 100 years, after the discovery of oil. Not a good example for other countries not rich in oil.

Well i know of other countries who are rich in oil (small nations As well as large ones) and they are failed states, or insignificant on the world stage. Doesn't matter the size of the blessing, its how you use it ! xD

 

[magra]

Well i know of other countries who are rich in oil (small nations As well as large ones) and they are failed states, or insignificant on the world stage. Doesn't matter the size of the blessing, its how you use it ! xD

I agree that UAE, Saudi etc have used the oil blessing better than some other countries. However, UAE, Saudi are rich only due to oil. 300 years ago, these countries were just backwater villages.

 

[Abu Dhabi]

I agree that UAE, Saudi etc have used the oil blessing better than some other countries. However, UAE, Saudi are rich only due to oil. 300 years ago, these countries were just backwater villages.

The UAE used its oil wisely to propel it to where it is now.

however, the UAE nowadays is not only rich because of oil. It is only fair to be precise with these sort of economical statistics

also, i noticed this trend where people make it seem like its a shame or disgrace that the UAE is rich because it used its oil to get to where it is now. What's the deal with that ? makes Z E R O sense in the real world.

 

[magra]

The UAE used its oil wisely to propel it to where it is now.

however, the UAE nowadays is not only rich because of oil. It is only fair to be precise with these sort of economical statistics

also, i noticed this trend where people make it seem like its a shame or disgrace that the UAE is rich because it used its oil to get to where it is now. What's the deal with that ? makes Z E R O sense in the real world.

I am not saying its a shame. I am just pointing to the obvious fact that UAE did not become rich before the discovery of oil.
So other nations with not so abundant pricey natural resource, cannot afford to break itself in smaller chunks.

 

[Maira La]

Pretty much every small island country is poor

In South Asia Maldives is the richest country with a GDP/Capita (nominal) of around ~ $11,000.