>Cuckthage

>Carthaginian Empire
>Neither Carthaginian
Phoenicians created it
>Nor an Empire
It was just a union of citystates and Phoenician dependencies

Kek, what an "empire"

A decentralized system tends to be more robust than a centeralized one

What do you mean by "robust". Do you mean stable? If you mean that, then a centralized system is a way to go if you want a more stable government.

Decentralized systems = weak governments, and thus do not live too long.

the structure of it being more stable. its an engineering concept rather than historical. like how the internet was built to withstand nukes? kinda like that with the phoenicians, greek 'polis', and expanded to unions like the united states or other expansionist systems that expand through colonies.

Sorry, could you dumb that down a bit for me: I couldn't really understand what the fuck you just told me.

>Carthagian
>Not Phoenician for New City

A decentralized graph structure is more robust to external influence. That means the system as a whole will hold even though individual nodes fail. Its the concept behind bitcoins, the internet, or pretty much anything else you find graph structures in.
Im just applying these principles to states. In modern times you will find the principle built directly into national constitutions to balance power. Back then you find them in actual city states.
Try to imagine why the proponents of a single EU entity push for it.

ya not sure what he is on about

yeah but i think their ability to be a military power will not differ much from a centralized one. Depending on the relations between sates, decentralized ones maybe be more of a pushover. Just look at how the greek states were changing teams all the fucking time and just letting people bribe the fuck out of them. Im not 1005 sure about the second one but i feel like it was similar when alexander conquered the persian empire, many of the small states didnt really give a fuck who ruled them.

i think it pretty much balances out in pros and cons.

I don't disagree with this in the context of history. The structure is only as good as its coherency. We have better communication and transportation these days so decenteralization is more favored since we dont need marathon runners running around making the connections. The phoenicians just had the advantage of maritime skills to fill in this spot which is why they were as successful as they were.

Also, the mutual excusitivity of centralized and decenteralization only applies to the geometrics of the structure. In the context of states, its more a gradual shift gradient depending on the level of power and autonomy of each node.
Its why kingdoms and empires split and break up, yet say for example the jews are still so good and being jews even to this day.

ha desu i dont think the jews are a great example.

That's what literally every empire at that time was you idiot. They couldn't order people to do shit instantaneously like we can now.

rome wasn't bar the logistical aspect.

Can you tell me why? They've been dispora'd all over the place yet they still hold unity/coherency solely by being a jew. And look where they are now. I think its an excellent example of decentralization.

That being said, I'd worry more about the Chinese and Indians (from a U.S. perspective) since they have already infiltrated and taken over the academic system. And they pull their own while disbarring others. All this is fine but they also bring their culture along while shitting on others. Its a real threat.

From the EU side, I would worry about the influx of muslims. I am just hoping they don't figure it out. All these are nice people individually, but when a decentralized race start banding together, shit gets serious.

Culture/religion is different to the hierarchies of a state so "nodes" are difficult to define.

Those cultural nodes lack co-dependency as opposed to states which depend on eachother militarily and economically.
With the lack of hierarchy thing this together may lead to overflexibility. Nodes in a state may become so distant from eachother that their relationship becomes qualitatively different from the relationship between the state nodes you described above (though obviously all these factors lie on continuum)

cultures and religions arent necessarily mutually exclusive. while you can say a state fails if it has been invaded and dismantled by another state, people can simultaneously hold different culturally properties.

I see what you are saying but you are decoupling the military and economical aspects of a state to the cultural/religious/values/laws that hold a state together and defines what it is to be a state.

The nodes in a state does indeed become qualitatively different, hence you have things like civil wars or smaller states vying for independence.

What I am saying is its up to the state and the heirarchies it implements to hold the various nodes together, whether they be cultural nodes, political nodes or discrete geographically tied nodes. When groups fail to merge to said state under the set of values that ties them together, then whatever is tied to the group, the geolocation, technology, human resources etc are lost.

The jew example was an example of a state, a set of coherency, with out a geographical coupling.

Han China had a very strong multilevel bureaucracy that imposed a uniform set of laws within almost everyone in their borders

Carthage means "new city" in Phonecian you absolute fucking retard

Does Nova Carthago mean "New New City"?

Jewish state is not jewish culture.

States stay in contingency with eachother for survival value; not the same for a religion or culture.

I also question how coherent jewish culture is.
Maybe this is a bigger reason for my view...

Definitions of coherency are different in states and religion/culture. i think thats actually the point i was trying to make in the beginning.

yes, I get that. But my original point was to argue from a purely mathematical construct, a graph, and the pros and cons of de/centralization applied.
So I guess I shouldn't have used the term 'state' as conventionally understood on Veeky Forums, although first applied to phoenician city states, but any 'state' of being, such as in a state machines, social network state/vertices, cultural means and deviations, being a jew, etc discrete or not. You know, how CS or social science literature regularly applies the term.