Replies

Recently I've been asking on these threads, can you name any institution apart from the military that you trust? Before writing this reply, I googled institutions that can be trusted and came up with this Gallup poll which shows on virtually every institution graded with very low marks by the public, usually around 30% "great deal/quite a lot" trust in a given institution except for the military which perennially earns 74% of public trust.

In this context I respond to your question, "Do you have a plan B? "

I respond to your follow-up assertion, "Hell, even your plan A is flawed."

I respond by saying that you presented a false binary choice. First the choice is false because the odds of the convention running away are virtually nil because of the arithmetic, of which you have been fully apprised to the effect that only 13 legislatures of different states out of 99 is sufficient to stop any proposed amendment.

The arithmetic is compelling and cannot be dismissed as you try to do by the bland assertion that thousands of legislators and/or delegates to one or two conventions will be bribed. The notion is unrealistic because it is not clear to the George Soros of this world whom they should suborn. Second, venal approaches to honest legislators and delegates would be made public and the whole scheme would be blown. Third, it is unlikely that we cannot find 13 patriotic legislature majorities, not 100% just majorities, to do the right thing.

The choice is false because there are other options. Although you and I are no doubt in agreement that our institutions are disintegrating, we still have some trust in the military. . My plan A, is to exhaust every rational and reasonable alternative to civil war and that certainly includes Article V because it is by any realistic measurement safe without the imagined downside bruited about by devotees of the NRA.

My plan B is to win over the military.

Yes, it is great to be in these interesting times and after three quarters of a century I hope to see a little bit more of them.

I challenge you to accept both plans and abandon this nonsense that by bringing terrorism into the heart of America the Republic will emerge from the battle unscathed, victorious, a representative democracy and not a shattered remnant more reminiscent of The Walking Dead than the kind of decent society all conservatives, you and I, yearn for.

The world that emerges from this guerrilla war marked by indiscriminate terrorism, even if your patriotic and well-meaning sons and nephews are victorious (remember they need rough men ready to do violence as allies who would have their own human lust for power) would be a world in which few would want to live, a place of warlords, barbarous, without the rule of law, without decency, in short, a world that is nasty and brutish.

There is no need to fail to do what might be done because we are locked in despair. As and when we are cast into a fight or submit to tyranny scenario, good men will know what to do. Good men will also do everything they can to avoid that eventuality.

"...to your follow-up assertion, 'Hell, even your plan A is flawed.'

I respond by saying that you presented a false binary choice. First the choice is false because the odds of the convention running away are virtually nil because of the arithmetic, of which you have been fully apprised to the effect that only 13 legislatures of different states out of 99 is sufficient to stop any proposed amendment.

The arithmetic is compelling and cannot be dismissed as you try to do by the bland assertion that thousands of legislators and/or delegates to one or two conventions will be bribed."

Nathan, that particular flaw I pointed out in your plan A was not the chance that it could go rogue and cause us to lose some very valuable parts of the Constitution. It was that by the same logic of yours that if 13 State legislatures could prevent anything bad from coming out of your Convention of States then a different set of 13 legislatures could prevent anything good from coming out as well.

My quote here: "Hell, even your plan A is flawed. Do you think they won't scuttle any convention that looks like it might actual solve some of our problems? They have more than enough traitors-within that can be called up to make sure of that."

That is the flaw in your plan A, not that the COS could go rogue. The logic is yours. If 13 can stop anything bad from coming out then a different 13 can stop anything good and therefore there is no upside to your COS. I hate to use a man's own reasoning against him, but it is what it is.

Thirteen states that are not controlled by legislatures that support our traditional form of government and would not support anything positive coming out of your convention:

Would you like me to name a few more, because I easily could.

Most of the rest of your post must have been meant for someone else. There was no need to tell me again how a revolt by men armed with rifles could never win against the US Military. I largely agree with you - but that has never been my point as to why the 2nd Amendment is so valuable to us that it should never be placed in play in the back room wheeling and dealing that would take place at your COS.

To briefly summarize my reasoning as to why the 2nd is so valuable to us and why a civil war will not come about:

1. As long as we have our guns and they know that we are willing to use them then the damage we would cause (yes, even in losing) would be catastrophic and they don't want that to happen to what they think will soon be their ~~country~~ possession.

2. The 2nd Amendment is not of great importance because it is what stops them from taking our guns. They have a long history of not giving a damn about laws. They do what they can get away with. They always have and they always will. The importance of the 2nd Amendment is that it gives us a common rallying point. It is so firmly woven into our mythos that every freeborn American male knows that we defend it to the death. It is the line in the sand that brings blood if crossed. Without it every man would have to decide for himself at what point he takes up arms - and that would give them leverage points to use in pulling us apart. With the 2nd Amendment we all stand together on the same ground.

And that is why I don't support your COS. The 2nd Amendment is just too valuable to us to ever be put at risk.