Silly point. -- Tell that to millions of our immigrant forefathers.
And the constitutional basics of our free republic are not 'experimentation'. These basics would be followed.
Our immigrant forefathers had the fortitude to back up their convictions and principles with actions. Today's citizens (regardless of political orientation) do not.
Your pronouncements have no basis in fact. - But we shall see.
Also I never said the 'constitutional basics of our free republic' was experimentation.
- Of course you didn't.
You said that people would 'experiment'. - They would not, as they'd be bound by the 'constitutional basics of our free republic'.
Try to learn the logic of debate.
Anyone looking at it with an open mind will soon discover that there is no mandate for freedom in this good ol' US of A -- other than the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, but those are just pieces of paper, after all -- and most of the brain-dead population like it that way.
They like the security of knowing the nanny state will take care of them when something goes wrong. They want the government to punish the crooks, whether those crooks are small-time drug pushers or big-time corporate thieves. They like the thought of being able to call a "code enforcement officer" down to the city hall and have him deal with the neighbors when they park their RV on the street.
In short, they like government. The more the better.
It's only when the JBTs come down on them personally, or on someone they know, that most Americans give a hoot about the dangers of Big Government. Talk to someone who has had to go through court to try to gain custody of his or her own offspring after the social services people learn from the school teacher that little Johnnie wasn't getting a proper breakfast, or that his mother whacked him on the behind for misbehaving. Talk to someone whose car was taken as "evidence" when an illegal search turned up contraband in the trunk. Talk to someone who just went through a divorce and is now having to defend himself against a tax audit brought on by a vengeful ex-spouse. These things are becoming more common every day, and though they don't always make the news the word gets out to friends and relatives. The pot is beginning to boil and smart frogs are ready to jump.
What are the choices? Are we supposed to believe that Republicans will fix things once they get control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency, or will it have to wait until the War on Terrorism is over, or they gain a veto-proof majority, or get two more appointments to the Supreme Court?
Many of us are getting tired of waiting.
If only we had the voting strength to remove the clowns who claim to be for smaller, less powerful government but all of a sudden shift direction when the titular head of their party proclaims a need to expand the Department of Education, establish a new Department of Homeland Security and give new surveillance powers to police in anticipation of further terrorist attacks (and what other kind of attack could we reasonably expect from a third-world nation that has no navy or air force and thus poses no military threat?) even as they search in vain to find significant policy issues to keep the voters from confusing them with the evil Democrats.
Oh, of course. We're for vouchers. We're for privatizing the armies of fumble-fingered baggage checkers that will make the airlines safe so they can go bankrupt. We're for saving Social Security even if means putting the entire (non-existent) trust fund in the declining stock market. We're for phasing out the death tax over ten years, but then bringing it back in the eleventh in case we need the extra money to balance the federal budget. We're fiscal conservatives, you know.
We're for providing subsidized prescriptions for the elderly; fully-funding Head Start for the young (and their working mothers); saving the construction industry with government-sponsored disaster insurance; saving the steel industry by imposing protective tariffs; saving the airlines, AMTRAK, the domestic auto makers, textiles, rubber, trucking, Greyhound, you name it.
We want to save the world!
And after that's done, are you planning to revisit the idea of restoring the American Republic? Or will you be too tired from fending off evil Democrats who've been trying to take credit for all the socialism that Republicans have achieved since taking over both the executive and legislative branches?
One of the advertised features of the federal system we have, as taught in textbooks if not always observed in reality, is each state's being able to establish a distinct set of laws for governing the area within its jurisdiction. Pragmatists like to call this having "50 laboratories of democracy."
The Constitution is silent on what a state must provide in the way of welfare benefits, public education, health care, land-use regulations, zoning, roads and Internet access. Its only provision is that the United States guarantee a Republican (not meaning the political party, necessarily) form of government.
In theory, then, a state could decide to opt out of many of the accepted amenities of the welfare state, just as Arizona has refused to go along with Daylight Saving Time (and the Freon ban, I understand).
Will 20,000 individuals be enough to do the trick?
It may be more than enough if they are all determined, dedicated activists who don't spend all day at their computer keyboards trying to convert the unconvertable.
Walter Williams tends toward secession as the most likely solution, but who knows?
Whatever comes of it, the Free State Project beats the more violent alternatives that have been suggested.