The Problem with Lawyers and the Constitution

Think Progress would prefer civil war to peaceful dissolution, yet they refer to Michael Boldin from the Tenth Amendment Center as an extremist. What secessionists have in common, on both sides, is the desire to exist under a system of “consent of the governed.” So we have two sides here: Think Progress, who prefers the status quo, even if it will lead to inevitable violence, and those seeking a peaceful solution where liberty can be realized and enjoyed by all. Now tell me, who is the extremist?

On November 10, 2018, the Abbeville Institute hosted an event called The Revival of Nullification and Secession in Dallas, TX. The purpose was to educate people on the means by which we can escape the hatred and hostility that is consuming not only headlines, but our very souls. The population of these United States is split pretty much equally in terms of core political values, the Left/Right paradigm. When legislation over social issues, whether within the delegated powers (see Article I, sec. 8) or not, are handed down from Washington, D.C., matters intended to be left with the States become a matter of contention, nationwide. And as we are seeing now, contention is leading to violence.

There is talk of another Civil War, arguments over whether secession is a viable option to prevent such a scenario, but little cohesion when it comes to accurate and historical analysis of the problem, how it came to be, and how it may be resolved peacefully.