Federal/Unitary State Switch

The countries in green are those with a federal system of government. The ones in blue those with a unitary system.

For the purposes of this thread your objective is to switch the two, so that federal countries like Germany, America and Russia become unitary ones and unitary countries like Britain, France and China become federal countries.

You should also try to keep the basic systems of government the same as possible, ie America is still a republic, Britain is still a monarchy, China is still notionally communist and so forth.
800px-Map_of_unitary_and_federal_states.svg.png
 
The countries in green are those with a federal system of government. The ones in blue those with a unitary system.

For the purposes of this thread your objective is to switch the two, so that federal countries like Germany, America and Russia become unitary ones and unitary countries like Britain, France and China become federal countries.

You should also try to keep the basic systems of government the same as possible, ie America is still a republic, Britain is still a monarchy, China is still notionally communist and so forth.
800px-Map_of_unitary_and_federal_states.svg.png


You'd have to gut a lot of the US constitution to "official" become unitary, but even today there's still a lot of centralization in the Federal government.

A big step towards unitary authority would be to abolish the National Guard system, taking away all military power from the states.

AFAIK, Germany is unitary in all but name, at least compared to the broad powers that states have in American federalism.

Conversely, it seems like Britain is federal in all but name (with devolved regional parliaments in Scotland and (IIRC) Northern Ireland.) Give Wales and England their own devolved parliaments and that would make it more federal.
 
Well, technically, Argentina was unitary between 1810 and 1820, and between 1824-1827. However, unitarysm was strongly resisted in the interior of the country, specially in the Eastern Provinces. Whenever Centralists tried to get a Unitary Constitution passed, formaly giving an unitarian legal framework to the country, the provinces would rebel, and depose the Central government. It happened twice: The Directorate fell in 1820, less than a year before the Congress approbed the 1819 Centralist Constitution (the Eastern provinces had boycoted the Congress); President Rivadavia was forced to resign in 1827 or 1828, shortly after the Centralists Constitution of 1826 had been apporobed.

If San Martín had obbeyed the Directorate in 1819 and had returned to Buenos Aires with the army stationed in Chile (which was getting ready for the naval campaign against Perú), the Central government might have beaten the armies of the eastern provinces at the Battle of Cepeda, and the 1819 Constitution might have been sustained. The same would have happened if the Northern army called back by the Central government hadn't rebelled in Cordoba.

It's not certain that the Central government would consolidate itself and last, but it's a possibility. If the government doesn' fall, and the constitution starts been applied, there might be a unitary Argentina instead off a federalist one.

------------------------
EDIT: This is of course, if you want a formally unitary Argentina. In practice, even if our Constitution is federalist, the Central government has much more power than provincial governments, cause it controls most of the sources of national funds. Many argue that this makesa our country a unitary state in all but in name.
 
Last edited:
AFAIK, Germany is unitary in all but name, at least compared to the broad powers that states have in American federalism.

WTF?
If own military power is the requirement of federal structure, then no country besides USA can be described as federal.

A clear horizontal division in legislative competence, which for me is the description of federalism, is clearly given in Germany. Every state has it´s own police force, court system (including difference in court processes), school systems etc. etc.
 
WTF?
If own military power is the requirement of federal structure, then no country besides USA can be described as federal.

A clear horizontal division in legislative competence, which for me is the description of federalism, is clearly given in Germany. Every state has it´s own police force, court system (including difference in court processes), school systems etc. etc.

I'm thinking more of "states' rights". In the US and Canada and (I would imagine) Russia, if the federal government exercises too much control, the states/provinces/federal entities tend to create a ruckus. Except for maybe Bavaria, I don't see that happening in Germany. The Länder have discretion in lots of areas, but I don't see major problems if the Bundesregierung tried to centralize it.
 
You'd have to gut a lot of the US constitution to "official" become unitary, but even today there's still a lot of centralization in the Federal government.

A big step towards unitary authority would be to abolish the National Guard system, taking away all military power from the states.

AFAIK, Germany is unitary in all but name, at least compared to the broad powers that states have in American federalism.

Conversely, it seems like Britain is federal in all but name (with devolved regional parliaments in Scotland and (IIRC) Northern Ireland.) Give Wales and England their own devolved parliaments and that would make it more federal.
wales has its own parliament. its just england that doesn't. what the point of any federalisation was i don't now. honestly, back in in my day,if they'd gone a nd done summat stupid like that, then they'd all ave got a clip round the ear and a "no more of that you cheeky young devils" for their trouble....blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,empire,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah, conscription,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah, give those kids a good hiding,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,education system today is deficient,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah,i blame their parents,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah, poor articulation, diction, and grammar,blah,blah,blah,blah,blah.
extract from speech of the grumpy old git.:)
 

Susano

Banned
WTF?
If own military power is the requirement of federal structure, then no country besides USA can be described as federal.

A clear horizontal division in legislative competence, which for me is the description of federalism, is clearly given in Germany. Every state has it´s own police force, court system (including difference in court processes), school systems etc. etc.

Well, theoretically. Practically, the state governments and the Bundesrat have formed something of a second federal government, what with common conferences in basically every field deciding on common standards etc. And that whole debatte about state mergers, that treats states as nothing more than just administrtaion units... I would call Germany crypto-centralist.
 
You should also try to keep the basic systems of government the same as possible, ie America is still a republic, Britain is still a monarchy, China is still notionally communist and so forth.
I wouldn't call the monarchy the basic system of government in Britain...
So I'm not sure what the OP is asking? Is he challenging us to historically make the states be otherwise?

It might be more fun to have a Unitary vs Federal war...Seems like a good match, and satisfies the "USA invades UK" hype that's flaired up lately ;)
 
hmmm, making Australia a unitary country without the state/territory govts ? Hmmm, WI somehow the entirety of the Australian colonial govt remained New Souh Wales as opposed to different colonies breaking off from NSW to become their own political/geographic entities ?
 
Top