Speak for yourself ...
You may find a few like minded followers, but I don't see this idea appealing to a critical mass anytime soon.
Could "a state" simply secede by refusing to pay taxes or follow federal laws? Non-violent action is preferable to taking up arms, but the federal government could respond with a variety of annoying actions of their own. Perhaps in the end a resolution could be reached.
Personally, though, I like having the freedom to leave my own corner of the country and settle elsewhere. I don't trust state authorities any more than I trust federal ones, so I don't support the idea of secession. I suspect most Americans are closer to my point of view than the secessionist.
Secession, by its very nature, does not require the approval of the federal government.
"Secession (derived from the Latin term secessio) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, or especially a political entity." Separation or "secession" by mutual consent is certainly a possibility. The idea that somehow you have to break all ties and in doing so demonstrate some kind of existential freedom, rather than work within the system for a parting of the ways is a bizarre and dangerous one. For a lot of secessionists the emotional act of slamming the door on the way out is more important and satisfying than the actual change in political status. Such emotionalism is where separationist movements often go wrong.
That's a lot like saying if you want to escape from jail, you need to get the warden's permission.
That's the same mistake. If your goal is getting out of jail with no repercussions or dangers, why not wait until you've served your time? Why is it so important that you break the law again or get exactly what you want when and how you want it? And how did being part of the United States of America become the equivalent of being incarcerated?