{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01782178217821782, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.439490445859873, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Federalism’s radical potential


 The ability to rely on federalism as an effective response to deep divisions in post-conflict societies is often impaired by parties requiring too great a consensus on the ideological premises of the re-founded state: on the nation’s essential character; on who bears the right of self-determination; and on the historical foundations of the political community. As a result, the radical potential of federalism—its ability to accommodate, within a single political order, political communities possessing substantially different conceptions of foundational political legitimacy—is lost. This article reviews the nature and history of federations in order to establish that this radical potential is at the very heart of federalism. It describes the dynamics of allegiance in federal societies and suggests why federal states can flourish even in the presence of such significant differences. It then notes seven approaches that can facilitate the success of such federations.