re: Atlanta's 'Cityhood' Movement & Jason Lary's Fight to Incorporate Stonecrest

It's the most abstract, general issue in the theory of politics and government, and ultimately, it's a question of scope. There will always be some political authority over smaller self-governing localities, but how do you limit the larger body's scope of authority?

If you look at federalism, how do you keep it from moving away from confederalism (general level of government is subordinate to the regional level), and toward a unitary state (regional level of government is subordinate to the general level)?

The ancient Israelites had a confederacy, but soon opted for a monarchy instead. The independent Greek city-states formed leagues to protect against Persia, but Athens grew in power. Russia agreed to honor a 1991 nuclear weapons agreement on sovereign borders with Ukraine, and then decided that Crimeans could vote themselves out. Some in Scotland want to leave the U.K., but the government in Spain doesn't want to allow them in the EU, because it would promote Basque separatism. Religious freedom exists in this country, and allows families to raise and educate their own children, but the state intervenes away. Same with Indian reservations.

From the family unit to the local municipality to the state to the sovereign country to the U.N., the world can't agree on what the proper scope of authority is.


In any case, that's all theorizing about how things ought to be. Luckily, the 'Cityhood' Movement seems to be fairly spontaneous and organic, and is propelled by economic factors (in favor of devolution) that can't easily be stopped in the current political system.

quote:

---

In a perfect world we would have a million countries.

---

Nothing wrong with that.