A Question for Article V State Amendment Convention Opponents

[Jacquerie]

To Free Republic opponents of Article V, I put this question, “what infringement of our natural and constitutional rights, or other high crime against our republic, could compel you to support an Article V state amendment convention to propose amendments to our constitution?”

[RKBA Democrat]

Well, I don’t recall chirping. See my post 53 in response.

I do view a large portion of the population as being capable of self governance. The article V strategy I think is simply flawed. And admittedly, I wish to live in a freer society before I keel over.

[RKBA Democrat]

Thanks. I’ve actually read your #51 a couple of times. To summarize, the success of an article V strategy is contingent on some as yet unrealized black swan event. It’s in effect a bit of a Hail Mary strategy. Hail Mary strategies, while stunning when they succeed, don’t succeed all that often. It also assumes a more or less unified response to the black swan event. Is that really a valid assumption?

Your post also seems to imply that an article V convention is the only viable strategy. I strongly disagree with that. There are other strategies on the table that are viable (more viable in my view) that are also not mutually exclusive to an article V convention. I make no secret of my advocacy of an internal relocation and concentration strategy as a way of achieving freedom and liberty. There are some advantages of such a strategy that are not immediately apparent, such as it separating the talkers from the doers. Another advantage of an internal relocation strategy is that it doesn’t preclude other strategies but rather allows you to enter into those strategies from a position of relative strength.

You close your post by noting that a general chooses his field of battle. Given. But I would also add that a general is wise to have a place of refuge to base his operations from.

[Jacquerie]

Is there an outrage that could prompt you to support an amendment convention?

[nathanbedford]

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

I know of no opposition to alternative approaches to reforming our runaway federal government held by advocates of The Article V process except opposition to nullification which seems to be the obsession of the rump of the John Birch Society.

Hell, I'm not even opposed to nullification if it works.

I concede I am ignorant of the Internal Relocation Strategy to which you allude and I cannot therefore comment.

Because it only takes 13 legislative bodies from 13 different states out of 99 legislative bodies to defeat an amendment, I am not optimistic about the chances of passage of real reform in the absence of some event that galvanizes the public and pressures state politicians to actually do something.

I am however optimistic, or should I say, pessimistic, that such a national event will occur in view of precarious nature of our finances and the increasing overreach of the federal government. Some time in the not too distant future the rubber band will break. This is not the politics of crisis but the fact of how the American democracy usually works. Democracies do not usually anticipate and avoid problems they correct problems after they occur when it is more expensive but when the political will is clear because the problem is clear.

So I don't think I am saying anything radical or terribly pessimistic, this is the way we function. We did not have a convention until it was clear that the Articles of Confederation had failed. We did not have a 13th amendment until we fought a civil war. We did not get Ronald Reagan until we had Jimmy Carter. We will not get reform of a system living on a credit card until we max the card out.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Is there an outrage that could prompt you to support an amendment convention?”

My willingness to support an article V convention would be based on an ability to convince at least 3/4 of the states that one was necessary and that the changes envisioned would be likely to increase our freedom. I find the chances of happening at this juncture extremely remote. So again, I don’t really buy off on the premise that an outrage is going to happen that makes a article V convention viable. Plainly put, there are at least 13 states that are absolutely fine if not giddy with the situation as it is. Unless and until you could convince enough of those states that a article V is in their best interest, an article V convention is simply not a viable strategy.

Nathan Bedford has made the point, and I think he’s correct, that a black swan event of some sort would be necessary to unify the population to rally behind an article V. In any case the problem with black swans is that they are relatively unusual (you can’t count on them happening) and are unpredictable in their impact.

I don’t plan to wait around. There are other viable strategies out there that I think have a better chance of success and in any case are not mutually exclusive if by some chance an article V does suddenly become viable , presumably after a black swan event.

[RKBA Democrat]

Again, thank you for a very enlightened post.

I agree that the chances of financial crisis are pretty high. Unfortunately, whether such a crisis becomes something that unifies people behind a pro freedom strategy is unknown. The financial crises in Greece and Cyprus certainly haven’t brought about pro freedom reforms. Whereas in Chile, it brought about pro free enterprise reforms, but at the same time ushering in a military junta.

As for the internal relocation strategy, there is only one group that I’m aware of that is promoting that. See my tag line. I actually was aware of this oh about 5 years ago. I pretty much dismissed it as another idea that would fizzle. For reasons that I don’t recall, I ran across the Free Staters again about six months ago and much to my surprise, they hadn’t fizzled. In fact, it looks like they’re actually going to pull it off. More importantly to me, the folks who have moved early have had a significant impact in NH. So much so that Free Staters are considered a threat. Some ‘rat legislator actually publicly characterized FSP as the biggest threat facing NH. You can’t buy endorsements like that. I also find it appealing that it stresses individual action rather than waiting for the rest of the crowd. I firmly believe that the freedom that matters is the freedom in your own backyard.

All that said, I have had my own personal reservations about FSP. Primarily with regard to the fact that it’s a libertarian movement, not a conservative one. I’m not a libertarian. However, with age I’m finding that I really don’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good enough. So I’ll take a 70% win over a 10% win and be happy with it.

[DiogenesLamp]

If that sentiment is correct, then it follows logically that America is no longer capable of self-government. If this is true, then what are the alternatives? Military dictatorship? Theocracy? The sundering of the Union?

I am of the opinion that America is no longer capable of self-government. The election of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ought to be proof enough for any rational person.

What destroyed us was the last three words of the 24th amendment. ("or other tax") Granting voting rights to non-taxpayers is a certain fiscal death sentence to any nation. We have enfranchised the stupid and parasitical, and they will support candidates that promise them goodies.

Our Federal Deficit has gone out of control because the Free Sh*t Army has no incentive to stop spending money, and the elected officials have no reason to avoid pandering to them.

What I see ahead is massive inflation, monetary devaluation, and economic collapse. With this there will be much civil unrest and bloodshed. The nation may end up splitting apart into regions, or perhaps it will continue limping along.

If we had a competent populace we could avoid all this but we don't, and so we won't.

[Publius]

I appreciate your honesty.

[Jacquerie]

Our Declaration noted that power is aggressive, and liberty is passive. “Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”

It is on display at this thread, for the President of the United States sponsors an invasion by millions across our southern border. He rewrites laws as he pleases. He charges executive branch agencies with silencing his political enemies, by any means necessary. Tyranny isn’t over the horizon, it is here and must be dealt with. Elections alone cannot reverse our course.

I wonder if some will have to wake up in a federal reeducation camp before they recognize the approaching end of our once republic, and that we must abolish a Form to which we are accustomed if we are not to terminate in utter slavery.

The Founders didn’t have constitutional means to right the wrongs of George III. They were forced to make horrible war. We are not, IF we exercise the peaceful means the Framers bequeathed. And our job is much easier than theirs, for the only Form that needs abolishing is the popular election of senators.

[Jacquerie]

The following isn’t designed to embarrass any recipients. I wish to bring clarity to what a federal convention should propose.

The most common alternative suggestion from opponents to Article V is to enforce the existing constitution through the election of more conservatives.

Insistence that all we need to do is elect good men and women is no different from the Progressive belief that socialism will "work" once the best brains are put in charge. Both rely on a fantasy, that their conservative or progressive politicians are immune to nature. These dogmas are comfortable ruts which have been refuted throughout history, and reflect a naiveté and ignorance of American history, government and passions common to all men. Given the chance, men will grasp power and money, no matter the damage their avarice and ambition do to the larger society.

What has been forgotten or probably never understood by both progs and some Article V opponents, was accepted as an undeniable truth to the Framing generation; liberty is secured through the division of power. It clearly hasn’t been secured by nonexistent self-enforcing words in the constitution. In fact, just about all that remains in force from our constitution is the structure of the government. We still have the institutions of congress, courts and a president, but little more. Nearly every other clause has been excised or bastardized such that they support infringement of our liberties.

Liberty is secured through the division of power. Undivided power is despotic; it can be nothing else.

So, if the goal is restoration of liberty, and liberty requires division of authority, the question is how to return the states to the senate. Since our oppressors in DC will never divest themselves of power, and the framers provided a way to go around DC, it stands to pure logic that an Article V convention is our only hope.

Given the anti-American indoctrination by K-12 and universities, I don’t expect young people to know our bedrock principles. What I find amazing is the lack of understanding at FreeRepublic. Open, bold despotism is in the door, it is in the living room. No even-year election can boot him back outdoors. There is one possible way out, Article V.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Founders didn’t have constitutional means to right the wrongs of George III. They were forced to make horrible war. We are not, IF we exercise the peaceful means the Framers bequeathed. And our job is much easier than theirs, for the only Form that needs abolishing is the popular election of senators.

I assume you know how to count. Their side now outnumbers our side. There isn't going to be a peaceful righting of this ship.

The Financial threat we are facing will only be solved if entitlements are scaled back. What member of the Free Sh*t Army is going to give up their unearned money?

They will see us at the polls, and they will win.

[Jacquerie]

I’ve explained to you in the past, the events which lead to the federal convention.

I will not waste time describing them to you again.

[Jacquerie]

Give up before the battle if you wish.

Where our republic is headed is no secret to state legislators. They chafe under federal diktats. Most state legislatures meet for a 2-3 months per year, after which they join the real world. It is not reasonable to equate them with the US Congress. Many members are business owners. Most know first hand the damage that is being done and our trajectory.

The fact that almost three dozen states have participated in the Assembly of States to organize the parliamentary rules of an amendment convention speaks loud and clear.

[Jacquerie]

I say there is no alternative to Article V. What say you?

[usconservative]

There isn't going to be a peaceful righting of this ship.

Amen to that. Praise the Lord and pass the ammo. Been saying that for 20 years or more, look at my tag line.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Liberty is secured through the division of power. Undivided power is despotic; it can be nothing else.”

Power can be divided or neutralized in many ways. One very obvious way is for people to do as Thoreau and Gandhi did and simply not obey. Others may choose to leave for a more favorable locale outside the US. I advocate internal relocation and concentration of like minded people in a more favorable locale within the US. Secession of a state or states is an option that is talked about fairly frequently, although I personally disagree with it.

There are several alternatives to to an article V in my view. It isn’t a “article V because there is nothing else” situation in my view.

[LS]

And I have explained them to you, but you choose to rewrite history.

[familyop]

"And our job is much easier than theirs, for the only Form that needs abolishing is the popular election of senators."

On average, state assembly members, their favorite few constituents (contributors) and their local government associates are pretty much commies. State and local government interests violate constitutional freedoms and hunger more for debt/revenues and pork any way that they can take them.

So as to the posted proposition,...

"“what infringement of our natural and constitutional rights, or other high crime against our republic, could compel you"

We see that for the threat that it is against our U.S. Constitution and the people of the United States.

[familyop]

The answer is that no violations committed against us will compel us to give bureaucrats and their friends even more political influence than they already have.

Money doesn't grow on trees. All levels of bureaucrats and their and their connected cronies against domestic competition caused the lack of production and debt problems in many ways, and most of them will eventually be laid off from their jobs or have their offices closed as a consequence. Look at their political speech. They're hysterical.

They are the "zombies." Maybe they'll riot better than their peers in Greece, when their ill-gotten incomes from debt no longer flow. We should stock up on popcorn.

[DiogenesLamp]

I say there is no alternative to Article V. What say you?

I say that the whole idea is an attempt at a "Hail Mary" pass, and I will be astonished if it does anything beneficial.

Again, I point out how many rotten amendments we have had after the first 10, and how we as a people are far stupider now.