Comment: No, that's not what I meant

(See in situ)


No, that's not what I meant

A constitutional convention would be a terrible idea, yes.

My point was that we have this federal government that is an occupying power. It is a combination of a Hamiltonian and Bankster empire, and operates beyond the bounds of the constitution. Its reach in our society is so expansive, no reform is possible under its watch. Reform is possible only outside of its watch.

So through a form of extreme nullification, a state refuses to recognize the right of the federal government to operate within its borders, because of its abuses. This is not rebellion, because the federal government's foreign power, nor its property or institutions are contested - though no tax money will leave the state if the state can help it. It is not secession, because neither the union nor the constitution are rejected, just the federal government.

The 'Reconstitution' is not a constitutional convention, but rather and constitutional congress meant to reorganize a new federal government with new officers.

In particular, the states initiating this process are not calling for a convention where they'll accept whatever the outcome is. They are saying that the Constitution must be reformed to grant less power to the federal government, or keep the same constitution but on the understanding that the new government won't have the power it was previously understood to have.

Any change would have to require 2/3 votes of the people in each state, minimum. It would have to be a supreme compromise.

Yes, there's the danger some crisis would be exploited to adopt a worse constitution. But if this process happens once and leads to a legitimate government, it can happen again.

So long as the federal power is intolerably coercive the states can withdraw support for it and demand reconstitution.

It's like a vote of no confidence on federal government. But rather than be integrated into the written constitution (say to be enacted by the Senate), it is a natural and assumed power of the states. That means the feds can't block it because the process isn't part of their system.