News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by elthran on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:11AM (#10923914)
Perhaps not a federation of city states, but I would definitely be in favour of a federation of England/Scotland/Wales/NI/Dependencies - perhaps even with London as a separate federal part
Re:Are cities the new countries? by arethuza on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:27AM (#10923977)
Arguably the UK already has a pretty "federal" structure - just that the whole thing is dominated, naturally enough by England and London.

Any attempt to balance things out would require devolving powers to the English regions, which nobody seems to want.

Re:Are cities the new countries? by pjc50 on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:42AM (#10924050)
pretty "federal" structure

Absolutely not, the separation of powers is both unclear and inconsistent among the devolved nations. It's also not really constitutionally guaranteed. The devolved assemblies have very limited powers over taxation and welfare spending.

Re:Are cities the new countries? by arethuza on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:01AM (#10924116)
Apologies - I guess I should have checked my understanding of "federal" before making such a comment!

I loved this description of the UK:

"an archipelagic supergroup comprised of four variously willing members."

mentioned in this article:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/09/the...

Re:Are cities the new countries? by pjc50 on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:40AM (#10924291)
That's a suitably euphemistic way of putting it :)

The thirty or so years of recent low-level civil war in Northern Ireland are not mentioned there, or indeed anywhere in mainstream UK politics.

The 19th century Empire was run centrally from Whitehall. Gradually it rolled back in the 20th century: Ireland, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Israel, various Arab middle eastern countries, and so on. This has left the country with an imperial-derived system suited for paternalistically ruling people it considers inferior from a distance. It's just that the distance has scoped down. People within the UK and even within England are starting to regard it as distant and uninterested, especially in the recent floods this year and the last. It's on a much smaller scale than the Katrina disaster but I think the resentment is starting to build in a similar way.

Small-government conservativism in the UK means considering abandoning Liverpool as it's too far away.

Re:Are cities the new countries? by s_kilk on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:12AM (#10924159)
See also the promise of greater powers for Scotland before the 2014 Independance Referendum, a promise which was later reneged on.

Westminster still very much holds the leash, and reserve the right to yank it at their leisure.

Re:Are cities the new countries? by s_kilk on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:13AM (#10923920)
Certainly, that alone would be a move in the right direction.

> London as a separate federal part

Not the first time I've heard the suggestion of ejecting London from the Union :)

Re:Are cities the new countries? by nkoren on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:21AM (#10923956)
My first real introduction to UK politics was listening to an only mildly tipsy ex-London mayor rant about how if he could, he'd gladly "pay the rest of the UK £10 billion to go fuck itself, and get us towed out into the mid-Atlantic and declared an independent city state."

This impressed me on several levels. :-)

Re:Are cities the new countries? by arethuza on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:30AM (#10923990)
Boris Johnson then?
Re:Are cities the new countries? by nkoren on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:49AM (#10924071)
Nope.
Re:Are cities the new countries? by arethuza on Monday January 18, 2016 @08:22AM (#10924201)
Was it a Mayor or a Lord Mayor?
Re:Are cities the new countries? by nkoren on Monday January 18, 2016 @09:49AM (#10924650)
An ex-mayor, and not a Lord Mayor. Really small search space here. :-)
Re:Are cities the new countries? by pjc50 on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:40AM (#10924046)
Indeed - London is a hugely different economy. But it relies on people commuting in across a huge area. Where all those salaries were counted would make a huge difference to how the system worked.

To make it work properly would probably require a different currency, so London£ could free-float to the sky like the Swiss Franc while the rest of the UK had a weaker £ more suited to export-driven economy. A large chunk of the economy would be exporting power and water to Londonistan.

London would become even more like Singapore or Dubai than it already is: skyscrapers for the mega-rich surrounded by immigrant guestworkers.

Re:Are cities the new countries? by Toenex on Monday January 18, 2016 @07:26AM (#10923974)
I always view London as a 'world capital' that just happens to reside in England.