politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Anyone under the delusion that splitting a country can be peaceful should research any split since the idea of nationalism took hold. India and Pakistan are still the odds on favorite to kill us all with a nuclear winter.
This reminds me of the spike in cellular biophoton emissions during mitosis.
Biophoton emissions, basically a faint glow of light emitted by living cells due to metabolic processes, increase sharply at the moment a cell replicates into two cells. It appears as a flash if observing these emissions.
There is a lot to learn about our ideal society by observing our biological processes. The human body is a good example of a functioning mass-scale social substrate. The representative sample that guides the body is billions of neurons. Considering a human body has around 37 trillion cells, and roughly 170 billion brain cells (86 billion neurons + 85 billion non-neural brain cells), that gives us around a 200:1 representative sample. For every 200 cells, there is 1 representative.
Fascinating, isn't it? Dunbar's number states humans can only keep track of a limited number of relationships. That number is a cognitive limit of around 150 stable relationships that we can keep track of. The limit's range has been stretched to 100 - 250 stable relationships.
In other words...the ratio of brain cells to other cells is nearly the same as Dunbar's number. It is reasonable to conclude, then, for a functioning society (because human bodies are far more functional than our planetary society), we need to have a ratio limit on representation. That limit is 200:1. For every 200 people, we need 1 representative.
For the US, for example, with 347 million people, a stable government would need 1.7 million representatives. Sounds crazy, doesn't it, compared to the ass backwards mechanism at play now? But think about it for a bit, and you will find why it is so stable.
That is too many people for an elite to control. It is too many to be corrupted. It adds redundancy. It adds direct accountability, each rep would have a personal relationship with their people, because it is within the Dunbar limit of what they can keep track of.
Something to think about.
States would have to be split as well, and random chunks of states. And soon as anyone says, "how do we split up the national debt" people would say huh, impossible to split.
I’m not aware of any major strife between Czechia and Slovakia. I may have missed it. It would obviously be harder in the US, where the divide is more urban vs. rural than regional, but I wouldn’t say it’s never been done.
Czechoslovakia was a combination of two historically distinct ethnic groups, so there was relatively little "sorting" during the partisan in the wake of the USSR's collapse.
Compared to the break up of Yugoslavia or the "Two State Solution" in Israel, it was utopian. But that's a hold over of the pre-WWs ethnic make up of these regions. You don't have anything like this in the much more internally diverse and mixed populations of the US.
Furthermore, over the last five years, the high rate of undocumented immigration and smuggling has lead to Czechnia tightening its border. We may see a rise in ethnic nationalism create friction in the future.