Yes, the farm boys in the revolutionary war (1776 -1781) didn’t know anything at all about the 1787 Constitution.

And yes, Americans can write a new Constitution and I ask how would you word it differently than the 1787 Constitution? And “who” would you designate to “enforce” it and by what method?

Concerning knowledge about the purpose of a government of a country of a free people, the 3 million Americans that ratified the 1787 Constitution evidently had much greater knowledge of the purpose of such a government than the 300 million Americans today.

Right & Wrong; are there not two wrongs, sin and crime? One of Americans Duty in Citizenship is, as a Juror, to judge crime. Considering the number of Americans in jail for possession of marijuana I believe Americans don’t know what a crime is.

Allan

The farm boys that fought in the Revolutionary War knew nothing of the 1787 Constitution, but they knew right from wrong. Are we that different today from them as people? If they could get a “new” constitution (old one was king Georges), then why can’t we get a new one too?….Are we at war now as they were then? Yep. Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City and on that farm in NH where the Hessians “got” that 68yr old grandma and her guns, just to name a few battles sites. If our Constitutional Republic has became so distorted that it is almost unrecognizable, and if our “elected” are so powerless as you say…then we are in a heep of trouble and should try something else. Since “one size will not fit all”, maybe we should divide. Hey, many States are no angels either, but I only live in one.

Please accept my high regard for your body of work and thought,
Your servant.
Casey

that way, people in CA can show how decentralization works well for them in …say….marijuana, and MT can show how it works well for them in guns. The list is nearly endless.

And since this is just how the founders wanted our society to be set up, I would balk at the use of the work “trick” – we’re just selling the advantages of radical decentralization and constitutionalism to people of all beliefs and backgrounds.

Basically sell the one with the most to gain on the issue on the idea of implementing nullification. Then go talk to the other side in and get them sold on the issue as well convening them they got the most to gain. (Key will be keeping them from knowing each others views until they begin to act and both are convened, at which both they both need to be convinced they are best situated to win, on the new battlefield)

Basically we could and SHOULD be playing both sides for 2 reasons:

1: There the most likely and most powerful to push relatively radical nullification actions.
2: If any one of them does it on their issues the other will innately come out against it unless we already convene them this is their path to victory.

In short we have to convene/trick them to wanting to play this game on a different battle field.

Almost inevitably, the one we will be most successful with will also be the one which is most powerful in that particular state. For exactly the fact that they are the most powerful in that state!

We have to keep both sides divide or in support nationally on the issue.

Decentralization is a great cause, lets exploit its strengths, in practical implementation!