Saturday, April 24, 2021

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I really don't want to listen to it, because there is no context in which this statement makes sense.

Is there a movement for a Constitutional amendment I'm unaware of? One to increase the number of senators populous (i.e., "urban") states have, v. "rural" states? Or to break up more states so we get more Senators in total? Or to eliminate the Senate, which was originally so "undemocratic" the Senators were appointed by state governors? (and the reality is, the Senate was meant to quell the "populism" of the "rural states.")

Except there weren't any "rural" states in 1788, because there weren't any "urban" states. Aside from the other fact, which is there are only two states in the country now with multiple large cities (Texas, California), and both of those states still have substantial rural populations.   So what “urban” states are there?  

The dichotomy Greenwald depends on here is a wholly false one; but it's also a dichotomy that dates back to the mid-19th century, when cities became important population centers, and the "country folk" were pitched against the "city folk" (Poe wrote about it, when it was new, as did Whitman.). A greater bid for unity, against such division, would actually be a lot more helpful. But is that what the Founding Fathers intended?
Yeah, there’s that, too.

No comments:

Post a Comment