I simply pointed out a successful nation with a very weak central government. I dispute that the Articles of Confederation were a “failure”. They were not used long enough to succeed or fail. They were replaced by those people who wanted a stronger central government and were opposed by those who feared that a strong central government would do exactly what it is doing today.
So I take umbrage with your claim the Articles of Confederation “failed” and I pointed out a successful nation that is Confederate rather than Federal like the USA, which is seeing rapidly consolidating national power.
If I could wave a magic wand, converting us back to the Articles would be dandy. The central government would have no power over the states beyond what they could beg from them, and we could get back to some measure of sanity with 50 different experiments again, rather than one tyrannical body which is dictating terms to the states, bankrupting the nation, and plunging us toward irreversible socialism.
I would take a weak central government over that.
One can not help but note that there are successful monarchies in the world. Perhaps, if we had given King George III more time. . .
parsy, who says if a bullfrog had wings, he wouldn’t whomp his *ss every time he jumped