by Justin D. Lowry, Georgia Conservative Weekly
Change is inevitable, and not all change is bad just as not all change is good. Government is a collection of law. Politics uses philosophy and theory. The way to test these is to compare them to events in history. If something didn’t work 100 years ago, it will not work now.
To put state sovereignty to this test, you will see that it worked for around 90-100 years. The Articles of Confederation clearly expressed states rights, and the Constitution gives states levels of autonomy.
When it comes to change, people will evaluate the action as right, wrong, easy, or difficult. It seems that what is right is always difficult and vice versa. I assure you that a call for state sovereignty is right, but is also very difficult. Most of this difficulty stems from misunderstandings. You will hear people say that this resolution means secession. This in no way means secession or a second Civil War. Instead of thinking of this as a Declaration of Independence, think of it as a Magna Carta. Its purpose is to limit the Federal government.
You will hear people claim that this resolution is purely symbolic and will not pass, but it’s a good message. I ask, what’s the purpose of a message if it isn’t followed through? It may be a good message but who is it good for? Is it good for the state that cowered to the Federal government? Is it good for the Federal government that flexed its might at the state and made it cower? Who do you think is best served by this message?
You may hear it said that these resolutions are unpatriotic. I assure you that patriotism isn’t love for you government, its love of your country. This country is built upon Liberty, and the Constitution limits the government to protect that liberty. What is more patriotic than defending the Constitution? Who is more patriotic, the one that defends the Constitution, or the one that blindly follows the government?
I believe it is also important to examine the two types of change. One is a slow, gradual change. It takes decades for this to take place. This type of change is multigenerational, that is it is started and young people of every generation are constantly recruited to energize it, for nothing is perpetual.
The other type of change is radical. It happens almost over night. This can be the worse kind of change, because it doesn’t allow time for adjustment.
The change that occurred in our country was very slow and gradual. They say that if you put a frog in water and slowly increase the temperature, the frog will not leap out as it nears boiling. I say look around, the water is getting hotter and hotter. For decades things were slowly crumbling around us. This nation is like an old house, you can’t see the cracks unless you compare it to an old photograph. I tell you to look at how our country was and count the cracks that have appeared in our foundation. We all know that after a foundation is damaged, the house will soon collapse.
So as things slowly changed, we as defenders of the Constitution sat around and watched. The mentality was wrong. People either thought that it would never happen, or that they couldn’t do anything to stop it. I assure you that those two mentalities are very dangerous.
Things can always change, regardless of how good the original way may be. The second mentality is actually correct. When you think that you can’t do something, you can’t. The strength is always in numbers. One stick will snap easily, but a bundle will hold strong. Always beware of people who won’t help because it’s against “the†way. A way should never be devoid of right or wrong and become “the†way. Regardless of how established it is, it will fall into one of the two categories.
The question is then how must we act. What type of change must we bring about? Gradual change is too slow, radical is too fast. We must achieve a perfect balance between patience and ferocity. Ferocity should always be synonymous with liberty. Consider the nature of a wild and domesticated dog. A domesticated dog enjoys its captivity, but a wild dog will fight fiercely to avoid capture.
That is how we must be. We must provide fierce, constant, and persistent pressure on our legislature. We must rally friends, neighbors, and strangers to our cause for them to do the same.
Our argument must be logical. I say we take our founders intentions to heart, but not have them be our argument. The truth is, most people don’t care what our founders intended, and it’s near impossible to make them care.
Our founders’ intentions make a great aid to our argument, but we must paint a picture of why our nation would be better with a weaker central government. Our argument is better served with facts of lower taxes, greater individual liberty, etc; as opposed to what Jefferson or Madison intended. As time erodes all things, sadly, it also erodes the meanings of words. That’s why we must consider this a renewal of Federalism, not a return to it.
We are by no means to disregard their words, their philosophy is true. We are to base our argument on their words, not have their words be the sole argument. You are stronger by reading their words and getting into their mindset than by just quoting their words.
This is the time to act. You must educate people on this matter. Instruct them to write their representatives to their state legislature, and to educate more people to do the same. Our strength will be in numbers. This is the opportunity to either do as we have done for decades, which was nothing, or we can act and work together to obtain this goal. The choice is yours to make.