The argument is well established except that the author omitted one crucial factor, which is, US became the only super power in the world in recent two decades. At the time the Constitution was drafted, nobody in his/her wildest dream that US would become the dominant power in this solar system. With the existence of outer threaten, branches (or parties) were driven to cooperate for their very own existence. The threaten was removed, so gone the drive.
My argument is also supported by one common phenomena in the business world: it's really rare that a successful company enjoys no political infight. The logic behind is the same: when insiders can obtain more benefit through relative cheap inner fight, they are no longer interested in relatively expensive, difficult and risky company growing strategy.
The argument is well established except that the author omitted one crucial factor, which is, US became the only super power in the world in recent two decades. At the time the Constitution was drafted, nobody in his/her wildest dream that US would become the dominant power in this solar system. With the existence of outer threaten, branches (or parties) were driven to cooperate for their very own existence. The threaten was removed, so gone the drive.
My argument is also supported by one common phenomena in the business world: it's really rare that a successful company enjoys no political infight. The logic behind is the same: when insiders can obtain more benefit through relative cheap inner fight, they are no longer interested in relatively expensive, difficult and risky company growing strategy.
Is there anything missing/wrong in my logic?