When one discusses the merits of colonialism, cannot their arguments address federalism as well?
I often see Americans rail against their federal government, pejoratively refer to government agents as feds and demand more rights for the states.
Here in British Columbia, Canada, many of our citizens are disgusted with the federal control of our off shore fisheries and apprehensive about the possibility of Ottawa ramming an oil pipeline through our province down our throats.
Just like building railways in Africa.
Newfoundland in a short space of time jumped from being a colony of London to a province of Canada with an interval of independance for less than 50 years during which it became clear they needed someone else to pay allegience to.
So what is the difference between colonialism and federalism? Why is the one more often scorned and the other more often lauded ?
It can’t be distance to the capital. Washington is a long way from Hawaii, just as London is a long way from the British colony The Falklands.
It can’t be race, as the American colonists were the same race as Londoners.
It might be the degree of control, but where’s the line ?
I don’t see much difference at all.
Discuss.