Klicka på en bild för att gå till Google Book Search.
|
Laddar... Downsizing the U.S.A (utgåvan 1997)av Thomas H. Naylor
VerksinformationDownsizing the U.S.A av Thomas H. Naylor
   Ingen/inga Det finns inga diskussioner på LibraryThing om den här boken.  ebnelson | Dec 22, 2009 |  inga recensioner | lägg till en recension
Naylor and William argue that our government, our cities, our corporations, our schools, our churches, our military, and our social welfare system are all too big, too powerful, too intrusive, too insular, and too unresponsive to the needs of individual citizens and small local communities. They propose specific strategies for decentralizing and downsizing virtually every major institution in America, including America itself. The authors audaciously call for the peaceful dissolution of the United States through secession and provide a thoughtful game plan for achieving this controversial objective. Inga biblioteksbeskrivningar kunde hittas. |
Pågående diskussionerIngen/ingaPopulära omslag
 Google Books — Laddar...GenrerMelvil Decimal System (DDC)306.0973Social sciences Social Sciences; Sociology and anthropology Culture and Institutions Biography And History North America United StatesKlassifikation enligt LCBetygMedelbetyg: (3.5)
Är det här du? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1
In short, the authors believe in traditionally sized lives. Ambition to grow larger is the common vice of the modern era, and they see downsizing as the key to progressing back to the tried and true cultural way of life older societies have. Or, as the authors seem to believe: downsizing the USA so we all look like Vermont.
The two biggest problems with their suggestion are
1. Their apparent ignorance of what it means to be a united republic of states. The authors seem to believe that the American Civil War was about slavery, when in reality, Lincoln taught us that we needed to go to war to save the Union. If a state could succeed from the Union because they didn’t like the federal governments’ laws, then states could easily become oppressive, rejecting universals stated in federal law for a locally preferred way of life.
2. For as much as the authors don’t like the tone of the federal government’s drumbeat towards bigness, they sure do like the fed’s ability to redistribute wealth. They suggest stopping subsidies that go to big businesses, freeing up the tax burden which would allow smaller businesses and communities to flourish. But then they turn around and suggest subsidizing small things—so the size of the feds wouldn’t be any different, just focused in a different direction. I think a little more study of conservative thinkers would have helped them craft a usable way of life where big businesses deserve as much skepticism as big government.
The authors learn from a variety of sources, pulling quotes as side-bar to chapter sections—a nice touch which simultaneously draws attention and makes the book’s layout more appealing. (