# Colonialism vs Federalism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colonialism-vs-federalism/634205 "2012-09-09T15:49:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colonialism-vs-federalism/634205/1 "2012-09-09T15:49:27Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colonialism-vs-federalism/634205/2 "2012-09-09T16:01:03Z")
Colonies are rarely asked for their assent to join whatever empire they’re part of. There is no current state/province that hasn’t assented to (and often initiated the process of) becoming a component part of the US/Canada. ETA: Although the US Civil War does somewhat complicate that argument. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colonialism-vs-federalism/634205/3 "2012-09-09T16:04:51Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Colonies are rarely asked for their assent to join whatever empire they’re part of. There is no current state/province that hasn’t assented to (and often initiated the process of) becoming a component part of the US/Canada. And not just that, colonies are excluded from the ongoing political process. There is only the most tenuous of connections between the two. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2012, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colonialism-vs-federalism/634205/4 "2012-09-09T20:51:48Z")
I would defend hierarchialism on the basis that different issues in government occur at varying natural physical scales. Petty crime, for instance, is best addressed locally, whereas drought relief needs work at a higher level, because it affects a much greater area. Cities can’t cope with military strategy or international diplomacy; the national government shouldn’t be bugging us about whether the lot at Sixth and Idaho should be zoned as a mini-mall or as residential. We need a rising arrangement of concentrically encompassing jurisdictions. We also benefit (a little) when, like the court system, there is a power of oversight and restitution. Zut: Federalism.