>We are way beyond the point where some slick procedural maneuvering will save us from serfdom.
Yes, but like my links show: some slick procedural maneuvering, combined with the will to fight for what you believe (even to the shedding of ones own blood) could.
>The time for that was about 40 years ago. Now, the FedGov has its hooks into the state too deeply.
Perhaps, perhaps not. If a state were to do what I described and illustrate that the Federal Government has NO INTENTION of keeping to its Constitutional obligations that only adds to the justification of a wide-spread tax-revolt. If enough people say f-you to the fed-gov (this may entail only using physical monies or barter) then the federal government will have no money to give away that will not be [plainly] monopoly-money.
>>Perhaps, perhaps not. If a state were to do what I described and illustrate that the Federal Government has NO INTENTION of keeping to its Constitutional obligations that only adds to the justification of a wide-spread tax-revolt.
Everyone already knows that the FedGov doesn’t care what the DWMs wrote in the Constitution over 200 years ago. Half of the population is too busy working to push back (because spending a night in jail on a civil disobedience charge is enough to get a lot of us fired).
The other half is just screaming “show us the money” and they don’t care where it comes from or who has to pay for it. That “other half” by the way, educates the children and enforces the laws so every year we spiral down more and more to our eventual high-tech serfdom).
Oh sure, if some state were to cut the FedGov off, it might wake people up, but Governors are politicians and politicians just don’t have it in them to take an action like this. Also, the people aren’t poor enough yet to be in a place where they have nothing to lose by going to war with the FedGov.