Unitary and Federal systems essential questions: The US and United Kingdom have different systems of government. Explain how the UK's national government differs from the US national government. What type of government does every US state have? Unitary or Federal? And how does that relationship between the state and local governments compared with the state and national governments? Thinking question: How did the United States path to independence impact the system of government that was created in 1787 (Ultimately, I'm asking why do you think we don't have a Unitary National government?)

Explain how the UK's national government differs from the US national government.

The UK government is unitary, meaning that most government functions are centralized in London. The US government is Federal, the central government in Washington D.C. has some functions, but the rest are left to the states.

What type of government does every US state have? Unitary

Every US state has a government modeled after the federal government. Each state has a legislative branch, an executive branch, and a judicial branch. Each state has an unitary government.

And how does that relationship between the state and local governments compared with the state and national governments?

The state governments have more power over local governments than the national government has over state governments. This is simply because state governments are unitary, while the federal government, is as the name says, federal.

How did the United States path to independence impact the system of government that was created in 1787

The North American colonies had a great degree of autonomy, and during most of their history, the British government did not meddle much in their internal affairs. This created a culture of political independence among the colonists, that was in part the inspiration of the U.S. Constitution.

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.