You are assuming that there is a desire for experimentation that is being stifled by government. But only a small minority of politics wonks is really interested in experimentation for its own sake. People who are in a state that is doing OK don’t want to face the consequences of a failed experiment...experimentation is great when someone else is doing it. And people. in a state that is not doing OK want to switch to a tried and tested alternative.
Where does the clarity come from? There isn’t consensus on what works and what doesn’t, because there is disagreement about what counts as success …is Singapore a glowing example of capitalism, or a terrible example of a police state? , Additionally politidal systems co exist with many confounders …physicalngeography, natural resources, religion, ethnicity, external aggressors, etc, which give plenty of scope for arguing that a state did not fail because of its political system. Are you saying more variation will settle these issues objectively? Even the value judgements?
only a small minority of politics wonks is really interested in experimentation for its own sake.
There is no need to force anyone to experiment – it will occur naturally. In virtually every country people with different political opinions are unevenly distributed. For example, in the US right-wingers are more common in Texas and left-wingers in California. If each state is given full autonomy in how to solve its internal problems (taxes, social policies etc.), the US will have data from 50 different experiments (or even more if internal autonomy is given on lower levels). Policies leading to best results can be copied by other states.
Are you saying more variation will settle these issues objectively? Even the value judgements?
No, I think all people should be allowed to use their own subjective opinion. That is precisely why delegating most powers to local governments might be a good solution. If you think “Singapore is a glowing example of capitalism”, you would be able to migrate to a community that is organized like Singapore. If you think it is “a terrible example of a police state”, you would have plenty of other options to choose from.
f each state is given full autonomy in how to solve its internal problems (taxes, social policies etc.), the US will have data from 50 different experiments (or even more if internal autonomy is given on lower levels).
I dont thinkl your distinction between the Experimental and the Natural answers. It isnt in the interests of most people to be involved i a deliberate experiment that results in bankrupty, or tyranny...but then it wouldn’t be in their interests to be involved in any natural drift that results in the same ends. People who don’t want to end up in the New Confedaracy, or the Socialist Republic of the Pacific, wouldnt vote for increased independence.
You are assuming that there is a desire for experimentation that is being stifled by government. But only a small minority of politics wonks is really interested in experimentation for its own sake. People who are in a state that is doing OK don’t want to face the consequences of a failed experiment...experimentation is great when someone else is doing it. And people. in a state that is not doing OK want to switch to a tried and tested alternative.
Where does the clarity come from? There isn’t consensus on what works and what doesn’t, because there is disagreement about what counts as success …is Singapore a glowing example of capitalism, or a terrible example of a police state? , Additionally politidal systems co exist with many confounders …physicalngeography, natural resources, religion, ethnicity, external aggressors, etc, which give plenty of scope for arguing that a state did not fail because of its political system. Are you saying more variation will settle these issues objectively? Even the value judgements?
There is no need to force anyone to experiment – it will occur naturally. In virtually every country people with different political opinions are unevenly distributed. For example, in the US right-wingers are more common in Texas and left-wingers in California. If each state is given full autonomy in how to solve its internal problems (taxes, social policies etc.), the US will have data from 50 different experiments (or even more if internal autonomy is given on lower levels). Policies leading to best results can be copied by other states.
No, I think all people should be allowed to use their own subjective opinion. That is precisely why delegating most powers to local governments might be a good solution. If you think “Singapore is a glowing example of capitalism”, you would be able to migrate to a community that is organized like Singapore. If you think it is “a terrible example of a police state”, you would have plenty of other options to choose from.
I dont thinkl your distinction between the Experimental and the Natural answers. It isnt in the interests of most people to be involved i a deliberate experiment that results in bankrupty, or tyranny...but then it wouldn’t be in their interests to be involved in any natural drift that results in the same ends. People who don’t want to end up in the New Confedaracy, or the Socialist Republic of the Pacific, wouldnt vote for increased independence.