The question was also posed to compel you, in the unlikely event that you were to accept the theoretical possibility that reform can possibly lead to good government, to tell us at last why you don't want to attempt an Article V reform. This thread, indeed every thread in which you interject an objection to undertaking Article V reform is, after all, a debate to enlist support for the reform of America according to conservative principles and to realign the perverted Constitution with the original instrument. Therefore, it is not merely a debate between you and me but a debate which the reader might consider in deciding whether to lend his support to a reform movement which, however slim or optimistic its chances of success, at least offers a chance to save the Republic.
I submit your diversionary tactics are done to conceal a fear that attention to Article V will delay the Civil War you so earnestly desire. I will withdraw the allegation the minute you tell me whether you would prefer a peaceful reform and explain why you want to prevent such an attempt at reform beyond the old chestnut that "it just won't work." I will accept your word because, by way of acknowledgment of your integrity, I believe you have refrained from telling us the flat truth because you are committed Christian who shrinks from lying about his motive or lying about any subject for that matter but who realizes that few would support a bloodthirsty yearning for war, and Civil War at that. As a Christian of integrity, you are unwilling to lie about your true position on wanting war. But to be worthy of our time this should not be a debate either about your motives or my motives, but about readers judging whether to support Article V.
I offer the following not in submission to your gamesmanship, rather I offer the following list of governments that have been peacefully reformed as a service to the fair-minded reader knowing that I will likely never get an answer to my question because I believe you to be trapped by your moral dilemma:
South Africa at the end of apartheid; the United States at the end of Jim Crow; Austria relieved of Soviet occupation; the German Federated Republic in 1949; the present government of Japan reforming itself after occupation; the present government of South Korea evolving, that is reforming itself into a democracy; the USSR; Poland; Latvia; Lithuania; Hungary; the Czech Republic; Slovakia; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Estonia; Georgia; Kazakhstan; Kyrgyzstan; Moldova; Tajikistan; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; Uzbekistan; Taiwan, reforming itself toward democracy; Nicaragua between leftist regimes; Innumerable British colonies gaining independence through peaceful reform; Ghana; Suriname; Spain reforming itself after Franco; Chile likewise.
I have no doubt that the quality of the reform will not please you in each instance but reforms they were and, by honest standards, they were peaceful. Tyranny is as much in the eye of the beholder as it is an objective reality. Thus, the end of Reconstruction in the American South can be regarded either as a peaceful reform or as a cowardly retreat depending on your eye's perspective. But I suspect that even among 1000 examples there can be no example that answers the "JUST ONE" gauntlet you have thrown down so I offer "JUST ONE" which I believe will be dispositive for the objective reader:
The Confederated states organized under the articles of Confederation reforming into the United States of America in 1787. It is more than a passing interest that this reform was accomplished by invoking the equivalent of Article V
