Description
What theory of federalism (or, if using Wright’s classification system, IGR model) best represents the American intergovernmental system? Give at least 3 reasons to support your claim and contrast your choice with at least 2 other models/theories. Conclude by identifying which theory/model best informs your research topic and question.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Copyright 1991. University Alabama Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
Preface
During the past fifteen years, I have moved from a concern
with one federal system, that of the United States of America, to a consideration of the comparative dimensions of
federal systems. My own curiosity led me into this exploration to discern the extent to which the American system was
special, unique, and different, as “everybody” always says it
is, and the extent to which it is like other federal systems.
My goal was to develop more sophisticated questions of
comparison than the simple one that is perhaps the foundation of curiosity about all things political.
To my great pleasure, I discovered that there was a place
in my own scheme of things for pursuing these lines of
inquiry. I also discovered after reading through the field
that, although one could learn a great deal from what had
been written already, questions still remained unanswered.
This book is a summation and reflection of what I have
learned to date. In addition, it is designed to suggest an
agenda of questions that have occurred to me as being of
particular importance for investigation or, perhaps more
accurately, for further investigation.
If this book has any purpose beyond the conveyance of
the joy of the exploration, it is to demonstrate that federalism offers a way to approach political phenomena in its own
right and is not to be subsumed within other models of
political inquiry. If the federalist way has a particular intellectual virtue, it is because, for students of federalism, every
good theoretical question must have a practical dimension
Xl
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
AN: 23320 ; Daniel J. Elazar.; Exploring Federalism
Account: liberty.main.ehost
xu
Preface
and vice versa. That is, federal theory, to be good theory,
must prove itself empirically, and the practical application
of federal arrangements must always rest on some set of
theoretical principles. Thus the study of federalism is central to political science because of its linking of theoretical
and practical wisdom, which is what all political science
should do.
There have been three critical federal experiments in the
history of humanity to date. The Israelite tribal federation
described in the Bible was the first. More than three thousand years ago, it formulated the founding principle of
federalism by transforming the vassel treaty among unequals into a covenant among equal partners (equal at least
for the purposes of the covenant) that led to the establishment of a polity of tribes maintaining their liberties within
the framework of a common constitution and law. Although external pressures ultimately brought about the demise of the tribal federation as a regime, the Jewish people
lived on as the first federal people, and they have continued
to use federal principles in their internal organization to the
present day. The second was the Swiss Confederation.
Seven hundred years ago it preserved liberty in medieval
Europe. Later it fostered the principal liberating stream of
the Protestant Reformation and survived to create a garden
spot in the world, self-governed by free people. The third
was the United States of America. Two hundred years ago it
became the first modern federation and, more recently, the
first federal superpower, which showed the way to combine
freedom and federalism in a continental-sized polity. It has
been my privilege to have been closely associated with the
current manifestations of all three in one way or another and
to have divided the writing of this book on location in all
three, particularly the first and the last.
Since beginning my comparative studies, I have become
directly and intimately involved with efforts to find a
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Preface
Xlll
federal solution for the conflict between Jews and Arabs
over Eretz Israel/Palestine and directly if far less intimately
involved in the search for or implementation of federal and
quasi-federal solutions to current problems of political organization in Cyprus, Italy, South Africa, and Spain. I have
followed closely the recent adjustments of the Brazilian,
Canadian, and Swiss federal systems through frequent sojourns in those countries and have come to know firsthand
the federal systems of Austria, Australia, India, Nigeria,
and Yugoslavia. I was also witness to the failed attempt at
devolution in the United Kingdom.
These experiences have been invaluable in furthering my
education, not only from the comparative perspective one
acquires through active study of different polities and regimes but through the special perspective one gains by trying to apply the fruits of one’s knowledge to concrete
situations, some of which lend themselves to relatively easy
resolutions of problems of constitution and reconstitution
through the application of federal principles and others of
which are highly intractable and well-nigh insoluble with
any set of political principles. lowe a great debt of gratitude
to all those actively involved in the public affairs of those
peoples and polities with whom I have come in contact in
the course of my experiences.
The principal personal benefit that I gained from this
effort was contact with many interesting people from
whom I have been learning regularly for the past number of
years. The greatest measure of my gratitude goes to my
colleagues at the Center for the Study of Federalism; Stephen L. Schechter, who coordinated the center’s initial
effort to enter the international arena and who in the process
became my close colleague and fast friend; Ellis Katz and
Benjamin Schuster, good friends, who held the fort at the
Center for the Study of Federalism while I was involved in
my overseas adventures; John Kincaid, first my student and
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
XIV
Preface
now good friend and collaborator, whose work on the relationship between culture, ideas, and history and whose current role as associate editor of Publius both represent major
contributions to the overall effort. The staff of the center,
headed for the last decade by Mary Duffy, has provided us
all and me personally with the support needed to carry out
our extensive activities.
In the course of my forays, I have been privileged to
participate in the founding of three other federalism-related
institutions: the Joint Center for Federal and Regional Studies in Basel, Switzerland; the Jerusalem Center for Public
Affairs in Jerusalem, Israel; and the International Association of Centers for Federal Studies (ACFS), the body that
links all the various centers for federal studies around the
world. The founding of these bodies led me to colleagues
and friends to whom I am in debt for advancing my education: Hans Briner and Max Frenkel in Switzerland; Han
Greilsammer, Moshe Hazani, Jacob Landau, Shmuel Sandler, and Efraim Torgovnik in Israel; and my other colleagues
in the ACFS: Ferdinand Kinsky of the Centre International
de Formation Europeenne (CIFE) in France, Diogo Lordello de Mello of the Instituto Brasileiro de Administracao
Municipal (IBAM) in Brazil, Russell Mathews of the Australian Center for Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations,
Richard Simeon of the Canadian Institute for Intergovernmental Relations, Robert M. Hawkins of the Sequoia Institute in California, and the late Denis de Rougemont of the
Institute for Higher European Studies in Geneva.
lowe a special intellectual debt to two close colleagues
and dear friends, Alexandre Marc and Vincent Ostrom. The
former, the leading spokesman for the idea of integral
federalism, introduced me to that system of thought, which
has had a strong impact on federalist thinking in Europe.
The work of the latter in developing the concept of constitutional choice has had a profound influence on my own
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Preface
xv
understanding of federalism as a system of government
based on choice and design rather than accident or force,
which gives federal arrangements their special character.
These few words cannot begin to acknowledge my debt to
them and the personal sentiments and ties of affection that
make the debt so pleasant to bear.
Among the other colleagues from whom I have learned in
the course of this adventure are Fried Esterbauer of Austria,
Antonio la Pergola of Italy, Jovan Djorjevic of Yugoslavia,
Donald Lutz, Elinor Ostrom, Vukan Kuic, Rozann Rothman, Ivo Duchacek, and Deil Wright of the United States,
and Filippo Sabetti of Italy and Canada, each of whom has
been among my teachers as they have broken new ground in
their inquiries.
Special thanks are due my research assistant, Joseph Marbach, for handling the final technical chores of preparing
this book for publication and preparing the index.
Support for my research came from several sources, including Bar Han University, the Earhart Foundation, the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, the National Endowment
for the Humanities, and Temple University through the
Center for the Study of Federalism. All have my deep gratitude. My special gratitude to Richard Ware and Anthony
Sullivan of the Earhart Foundation and Joseph Duffy and
Phillip Marcus of the NEH for their support of my ideas
and efforts.
The catalyst for this book was the invitation extended to
me by The University of Alabama Department of Political
Science to lecture in comparative federalism in their annual
series in 1983. The first draft of this book was prepared for
and delivered through that distinguished series. My thanks
to Coleman G. Ransome, director of the series, and William
Stewart of the department, for the many kindnesses shown
me during my stay at the University.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
XVI
Preface
My greatest joy in all of this activity was that associated
with the founding and development of the Jerusalem Institute for Federal Studies, now enlarged as the Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, of which the former remains a
principal pillar. The federal idea has its origins in the segment of western Asia which became known more than three
thousand years ago as Eretz Israel (the Land ofIsrael). It has
been my privilege to bring back to that land the organized
and systematic expression of that idea in its political context
through the Jerusalem Center and, via the center, into the
Israeli body politic and the larger maelstrom of Middle
Eastern politics. That task continues to engage the greater
part of my energies in that curious combination of frustration and reward which is so characteristic of the region of
which the center is a part.
Daniel J. Elazar
Jerusalem
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:37 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Copyright 1991. University Alabama Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
1
Why Federalism?
Human, and hence scholarly, concern with politics focuses
on three general themes: the pursuit of political justice to
achieve political order; the search for understanding of the
empirical reality of political power and its exercise; and the
creation of an appropriate civic environment through civil
society and civil community capable of integrating the first
two themes to produce the good political life. Political science as a discipline was founded and has developed in
pursuit of those three concerns. In that pursuit, political scientists have uncovered or identified certain architectonic
principles, seminal ideas, and plain political truths that capture the reality of political life or some significant segment
of it and relate that reality to larger principles ofjustice and
political order and to practical yet normative civic purposes.
One of the major recurring principles of political import
which informs and encompasses all three themes is federalism-an idea that defines political justice, shapes political
behavior, and directs humans toward an appropriately civic
synthesis of the two. Through its covenantal foundations,
federalism is an idea whose importance is akin to natural law
in defining justice and to natural right in delineating the
origins and proper constitution of political society. Although those foundations have been somewhat eclipsed
since the shift to organic and then positivistic theories of
politics, which began in the mid-nineteenth century,
federalism as a form of political organization has grown as a
factor shaping political behavior. Now, in the crisis oftran1
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
AN: 23320 ; Daniel J. Elazar.; Exploring Federalism
Account: liberty.main.ehost
2
Why Federalism?
sltlOn from the modern to the postmodern epochs, the
federal idea is resurfacing as a significant political force just
as it did in the transition from the late medieval to the modern epoch, which took place from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. 1
Federalism is resurfacing as a political force because it
serves well the principle that there are no simple majorities
or minorities but that all majorities are compounded of
congeries of groups, and the corollary principle of minority
rights, which not only protects the possibility for minorities to preserve themselves but forces majorities to be
compound rather than artificially simple. It serves those
principles by emphasizing the consensual basis of the polity
and the importance ofliberty in the constitution and maintenance of democratic republics. Both principles are especially
important in an increasingly complex and interdependent
world, where people and peoples must live together
whether they like it or not and even aspire to do so democratically. Hence it is not surprising that peoples and states
throughout the world are looking for federal solutions to
the problems of political integration within a democratic
framework.
Federalism and the Origins
of the Polity
Since its beginnings, political science has identified three
basic ways in which polities come into existence: conquest
(force, in the words of Federalist No.1), organic development (for the Federalist, accident), and covenant (choice).
These questions of origins are not abstract; the mode of
founding of a polity does much to determine the framework
for its subsequent political life.
Conquest can be understood to include not only its most
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Why Federalism?
3
direct manifestation-a conqueror gaining control of a land
or a people-but also such subsidiary ways as a revolutionary conquest of an existing state, a coup d’etat, or even an
entrepreneur conquering a market and organizing his control throur-h corporate means. Conquest tends to produce
hierarchically organized regimes ruled in an authoritarian
manner: power pyramids with the conqueror on top, his
agents in the middle, and the people underneath the governing structure. The original expression of this form of polity
was the Pharaonic state of ancient Egypt. 2 It was hardly an
accident that those rulers who brought the Pharaonic state
to its fullest development had the pyramids built as their
tombs. Although the Pharaonic model has been judged illegitimate in Western society, modern totalitarian theories,
particularly fascism and nazism, have attempted to give it a
certain theoretical legitimacy.
Organic evolution involves the development of political
life from its beginnings in families, tribes, and villages to
larger polities in such a way that institutions, constitutional
relationships, and power alignments emerge in response to
the interaction between past precedent and changing circumstances, with a minimum of deliberate constitutional
choice. The end result tends to be a polity with a single
center of power organized in one of several ways. Classic
Greek political thought emphasized the organic evolution
of the polity and rejected any other means of polity-building as deficient or improper. The organic model is closely
related to the concept of natural law in the political order. 3
The organic model has proved most attractive to political
philosophers precisely because at its best it seems to reflect
the natural order of things. Thus it has received the most
intellectual and academic attention. Just as conquest tends
to produce hierarchically organized regimes ruled in an authoritarian manner, however, organic evolution tends to
produce oligarchic regimes, which at their best have an
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
4
Why Federalism?
aristocratic flavor and at their worst are simply the rule of
the many by the few. In the first, the goal is to control the
top of the pyramid; in the second, the goal is to control the
center of power.
Covenantal foundings emphasize the deliberate coming
together of humans as equals to establish bodies politic in
such a way that all reaffirm their fundamental equality and
retain their basic rights. 4 Even the Hobbesian covenantand he specifically uses that term-which establishes a polity in which power is vested in a single sovereign maintains
this fundamental equality although, in practice, it could not
coexist with the system of rule that Hobbes requires. 5 Polities whose origins are covenantal reflect the exercise of
constitutional choice and broad-based participation in constitutional design. Polities founded by covenant are essentially federal in character, in the original meaning of the
term, whether or not they are federal in structure. That is,
each polity is a matrix compounded of equal confederates
who come together freely and retain their respective integrities even as they are bound in a common whole. Such
polities are republican by definition, and power within
them must be diffused among many centers or the various
cells within the matrix.
Recurring expressions of the covenant or federal model
are found in ancient Israel, whose people started out as
rebels against the Pharaonic model; among the medieval
rebels against the Holy Roman Empire; in the Reformation
era among rebels against the Catholic hierarchy; among the
early modern republicans who rebelled against either hierarchical or oligarchic regimes; and in authentic modern
federal systems. Frontiersmen generally-people who have
gone out to settle new areas where there were no established
patterns of governance in which to fit and who, therefore,
have had to compact with one another to create governing
institutions-are to be found among the most active cove-
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Why Federalism?
5
nanters and builders of federal institutions beyond that original covenant.
The Federal Idea
As many philosophers, theologians, and political theorists in the Western world have noted, the federal idea has
its roots in the Bible. 6 Indeed, the first usage of the term was
for theological purposes, to define the partnership between
man and God described in the Bible, which, in turn, gave
form to the idea of a covenantal (or federal) relationship
between individuals and families leading to the formation
of a body politic and between bodies politic leading to the
creation of compound polities. The political applications of
the theological usage gave rise to the transformation of the
term “federal” into an explicitly political concept. 7
The term “federal” is derived from the Latin foedus,
which, like the Hebrew term brit, means covenant. In essence,
a federal arrangement is one of partnership, established and
regulated by a covenant, whose internal relationships reflect
the special kind of sharing that must prevail among the
partners, based on a mutual recognition of the integrity of
each partner and the attempt to foster a special unity among
them. Significantly, shalom, the Hebrew term for peace, is a
cognate of brit, having to do with the creation of the covenantal wholeness that is true peace. 8
Federal principles are concerned with the combination of
self-rule and shared rule. In the broadest sense, federalism
involves the linking of individuals, groups, and polities in
lasting but limited union in such a way as to provide for the
energetic pursuit of common ends while maintaining the
respective integrities of all parties. As a political principle,
federalism has to do with the constitutional diffusion of
power so that the constituting elements in a federal arrange-
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
6
Why Federalism?
ment share in the processes of common policy making and
administration by right, while the activities of the common
government are conducted in such a way as to maintain
their respective integrities. Federal systems do this by constitutionally distributing power among general and constituent governing bodies in a manner designed to protect the
existence and authority of all. In a federal system, basic
policies are made and implemented through negotiation in
some form so that all can share in the system’s decisionmaking and executing processes.
The Federalist Revolution
The federalist revolution is among the most widespread-if one of the most unnoticed-of the various revolutions that are changing the face of the globe in our time. In
the modern and postmodern epochs federalism has
emerged as a major means of accommodating the spreading
desire of people to preserve or revive the advantages of small
societies with the growing necessity for larger combinations to employ common resources or to maintain or
strengthen their cultural distinctiveness within more extensive polities. Consequently, federal arrangements have been
widely applied, on one hand, to integrate new polities while
preserving legitimate internal diversities and, on the other,
to link established polities for economic advantage and
greater security. Nearly 40 percent of the world’s population now lives within polities that are formally federal; another third live in polities that apply federal arrangements in
some way.9
The term “federal arrangements” suggest that there is
more than one way to apply federal principles. Indeed, to
use a biological analogy, federalism can be considered a
genus of political organization of which there are several
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Why Federalism?
7
species. Europe knew of only one federal arrangement, confederation, whereby several preexisting polities joined together to form a common government for strictly limited
purposes, usually foreign affairs and defense, which remained dependent upon its constituent polities. Two centuries ago, the United States invented modern federalism
and added federation as a second form, one that was widely
emulated in the nineteenth century. A federation is a polity
compounded of strong constituent entities and a strong
general government, each possessing powers delegated to it
by the people and empowered to deal directly with the
citizenry in the exercise of those powers.
In the twentieth century, especially since World War II,
new federal arrangements have been developed, or federal
elements have been recognized in older ones previously not
well understood. Federacies, associated state arrangements, and
common markets are postmodern applications of the federal
principle. In a federacy arrangement, a larger power and a
smaller polity are linked asymmetrically in a federal relationship whereby the latter has greater autonomy than
other segments of the former and, in return, has a smaller
role in the governance of the larger power. The relationship
between them is more like that of a federation than a confederation and can be dissolved only by mutual agreement.
Associated state arrangements are equally asymmetrical but
are like confederations in that they can be dissolved unilaterally by either of the parties. Consequently, the associated states have even less of a role in the governance of the
associated power. Common markets are forms of confederation emphasizing shared economic rather than political functions.
Political scientists have rediscovered the federal characteristics present in consociational polities, unions, and leagues.
Consociational polities are non territorial federations in
which polities divided into trans generational religious,
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
8
Why Federalism?
cultural, ethnic, or ideological groupings are constituted as
federations of “camps,” “sectors,” or “pillars” and jointly
governed by coalitions of the leaders of each. Unions are
polities compounded in such a way that their constituent
entities preserve their respective integrities primarily or exclusively through the common organs of the general government rather than through dual government structures.
Leagues, on the other hand, are linkages of politically independent polities for specific purposes, which function
through a common secretariat rather than a government
and from which members may unilaterally withdraw. Although neither is a species offederalism, properly speaking,
both use federal principles in their constitution and governance. New regional arrangements, which are essentially
leagues that emphasize regional development, represent
more limited applications of federal mechanisms. There is
every reason to expect that in the postmodern world new
applications of the federal principle will be developed in
addition to the arrangements we already know, including
jUnctional authorities for the joint implementation of particular tasks and condominiums involving joint rule by two
powers over a shared territory in such a way that the inhabitants of the latter have substantial self-rule. Thus reality is
coming to reflect the various faces of federalism.
A major reason for this evolution lies in the reassertion of
ethnic and regional identities, now worldwide in scope,
which promises to be one of the major political issues of this
generation and the next century. There are some 3,000 ethnic or tribal groups in the world conscious of their respective identities. Of the more than 160 politically “sovereign”
states now in existence, more than 140 are multiethnic in
composition. More than one-third of those states, 58 to be
exact, are involved in formal arrangements using federal
principles in some way to accommodate demands for selfrule or shared rule within their boundaries or in partnership
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Why Federalism?
9
with other polities. In sum, although the ideology of the
nation-state-a single state embracing a single nation-remains strong, the nation-state itself is rare. to
The federalist revolution in Western Europe is taking on
two forms. On one hand, Western Europe is moving toward a new-style confederation of old states through the
European Community and, on the other, there is a revival of
even older ethnic and regional identities in the political
arena. As a result, Belgium, Italy, and Spain have constitutionally regionalized themselves or are in the process of
doing so, and even France is being forced to move in that
direction, at least in the case of Corsica. Portugal has devolved power to its island provinces-as the Netherlands
and Denmark have long since done. Switzerland, Germany,
and Austria, already federal systems, are undergoing an
intensification of their federalist dimensions in one way or
another. The issue remains alive, if unresolved, in Britain.
The idea of a Europe of ethnic regions is a potent force on
that continent. 11
Most of the new states of Asia and Africa must come to
grips with the multiethnic issue. It is an issue that can be
accommodated peacefully only through the application of
federal principles that will combine kinship (the basis of
ethnicity) and consent (the basis of democratic government)
into politically viable, constitutionally protected arrangements involving territorial and nonterritorial polities. Although only a few of those states have formally federal
systems, as in India, Malaysia, Nigeria, and Pakistan, a
number of others have adopted other federal arrangements
internally and are combining in multinational arrangements
on a regional basis. 12
Western Asia and the eastern Mediterranean region,
known collectively as the Middle East, are no exceptions to
this problem of ethnic diversity. Indeed, many of that region’s current problems can be traced to the breakdown of
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
10
Why Federalism?
the Ottoman Empire, which had succeeded in accommodating communal diversity within a universal state for
several centuries. The intercommunal wars in Cyprus, Iraq,
Lebanon, and Sudan, not to speak of the minority problems
in Egypt, Iran, and Syria and the Israel-Arab conflict, offer
headline testimony to this reality. Federal solutions are no
less relevant in the Middle East than elsewhere, but especially in the Middle East is the need great for a postmodern federalism that is not simply based upon territorial
boundaries but recognizes the existence of long-enduring
peoples as well. 13
On the other hand, in the older, more established federal
systems of North America, the reemphasis of ethnic and
cultural differences has challenged accepted federal arrangements. In Canada, this challenge has taken the form of a
provincial secessionist movement and in the United States,
an emphasis on nonterritorial as against territorial-based
subnational loyalties on one hand and a revival of Native
American (Indian) tribal aspirations on the other. 14 Latin
America, the first cultural area outside of the United States
to adopt federal solutions to encourage political liberty,
continues to struggle with the problems of reconciling the
republican dimensions of federalism with its penchant for
autocratic leadership.1s
In sum, federal forms have been applied to a widening
variety of relationships ranging from federalism in support
of group pluralism and individual liberties in the United
States, to federalism in support of local liberties in
Switzerland and federalism on a linguistic basis in India, to
federalism as a means of gaining mild decentralization in
Venezuela. Federal arrangements to accommodate ethnic
differences are becoming more widespread than ever in
Canada, Belgium, Spain, and the United Kingdom (under
other names), Malaysia, and Nigeria. In every case, these
developments have emerged as practical responses to real
situations.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/21/2024 9:44 PM via LIBERTY UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
Why Federalism?
11
In most if not all of these cases, whether they know it or
not, the various parties have arrived at the point which the
late Martin Diamond described as the classic position of
federalism-the position expressed by the song that Jimmy
Durante, the American comedian, belted out in the film,
The Man Who Came to Dinner: “Did you ever have the feeling that you want to go, and the feeling that you want to
stay?” That is the classic problem for which federalism, as a
technology, was invented.
Federalism, Conflict Resolution, and Political
Integration
In its quest for a stable and peaceful world, humanity
today finds itself confronted with a number of political
problems, many of which are seemingly intransigent,
whose sources lie in conflicting national, ethnic, linguistic,
and racial claims arising out of historical experiences. Some
of these problems are headline material almost daily, others
are less visible but consistently aggravating, and still others
have been temporarily submerged but only await the appropriate moment to reappear further to disturb the worldwi
