Confederalist Paper #2 – One United Confederacy


Confederalist Paper #2

Making a Case for a New American Confederacy under the New Articles of Confederation (NAC)

One United Confederacy

To the People of all the States of Union:

WHEN the people of America reflect that they are now called upon to decide a question, which, in its consequences, must prove one of the most important that ever engaged their attention, the propriety of their taking a very comprehensive, as well as a very serious, view of it, will be evident.

Nothing is more sorrowful than the necessity of government, and it is equally sad, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must, unfortunately, cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers. It is well worthy of consideration therefore, whether it would conduce more to the interest of the people of America that they should, to all general purposes, be one consolidated nation, under one centralized government, as presently constituted under the United States Constitution, or that they should be one consolidated confederacy under the proposed New Articles of Confederation, and give back to each State the same kind of powers which they have placed in the current national government.

It has until lately been a received and uncontradicted opinion that the prosperity of the people of America depended on their continuing firmly united, and the wishes, prayers, and efforts of our best and wisest citizens have been constantly directed to that object. But politicians now appear, who insist that this opinion is erroneous, and that instead of looking for safety and happiness in union, we ought to seek it in a division of the States into multiple and distinct confederacies or sovereignties, through secession. However extraordinary this new doctrine may appear, it nevertheless has its advocates; and certain characters who were much opposed to it formerly, are at present of the number. Whatever may be the arguments or inducements which have wrought this change in the sentiments and declarations of these gentlemen, it certainly would not be wise in the people at large to adopt these new political tenets without being fully convinced that they are founded in truth and sound policy.

It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, widespreading country was the portion of our western sons of liberty. Providence has in a particular manner blessed it with a variety of soils and productions, and watered it with innumerable streams, for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants. A succession of navigable waters forms a kind of chain round its borders, as if to bind it together; while the most noble rivers in the world, running at convenient distances, present them with highways for the easy communication of friendly aids, and the mutual transportation and exchange of their various commodities.

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody Revolutionary war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.

Similar sentiments have hitherto prevailed among all orders and denominations of men among us. To all general purposes we have uniformly been one people each individual citizen everywhere enjoying the same rights, privileges, and protection. As a nation we have made peace and war; as a nation we have vanquished our common enemies; as a nation we have formed alliances, and made treaties, and entered into various compacts and conventions with foreign states.

A strong sense of the value and blessings of union induced the people, at a very early period, to institute a Confederacy under the Articles of Confederation to preserve and perpetuate it. They formed it almost as soon as they had a political existence; nay, at a time when their habitations were in flames, when many of their citizens were bleeding, and when the progress of hostility and desolation left little room for those calm and mature inquiries and reflections which must ever precede the formation of a wise and well-balanced government for a free people. It is not to be wondered at, that a government instituted in times so inauspicious, should on experiment be found greatly deficient and inadequate to the purpose it was intended to answer.

This intelligent people perceived and regretted these defects. Still continuing no less attached to union than enamored of liberty, they observed the danger which immediately threatened the former and more remotely the latter; and being pursuaded that ample security for both could only be found in a better formed Confederacy more wisely framed, they as with one voice, convened the convention at Philadelphia, to take that important subject under consideration.

This convention, composed of men who possessed the confidence of the people, and many of whom had become highly distinguished by their patriotism, virtue and wisdom, in times which tried the minds and hearts of men, undertook the arduous task, but failed to accomplish it. Instead, in the mild season of peace, with minds unoccupied by other subjects, they passed many months in cool, uninterrupted, and daily consultation and worked on the creation of a national government; and finally, without having been awed by power, or influenced by any passions except love for their country, they presented and recommended to the people the well-intentioned, but misguided United States Constitution produced by their joint and very unanimous councils.

Admit, for so is the fact, that the United States Constitution, which was at first only recommended, but then adopted by ratification, was later imposed by force during our Civil War, and also let it be admitted that the New Articles of Confederation, which would establish a completely voluntary and free Confederacy and correct the deficiency of the former Confederacy under the first set of Articles, are neither recommended to blind approbation, nor to blind reprobation; but to that sedate and candid consideration which the magnitude and importance of the subject demand, and which it certainly ought to receive. But this (as was remarked in the foregoing number of this paper) is more to be wished than expected, that it may be so considered and examined. Experience on a former occasion teaches us not to be too sanguine in such hopes. It is not yet forgotten that well-grounded apprehensions of imminent danger induced the people of America to form the memorable Congress of 1774. That body recommended certain measures to their constituents, and the event proved their wisdom; yet it is fresh in our memories how soon the press began to teem with pamphlets and weekly papers against those very measures. Not only many of the officers of government, who obeyed the dictates of personal interest, but others, from a mistaken estimate of consequences, or the undue influence of former attachments, or whose ambition aimed at objects which did not correspond with the public good, were indefatigable in their efforts to pursuade the people to reject the advice of that patriotic Congress. Many, indeed, were deceived and deluded, but the great majority of the people reasoned and decided judiciously; and happy they are in reflecting that they did so.

They considered that the Congress was composed of many wise and experienced men. That, being convened from different parts of the country, they brought with them and communicated to each other a variety of useful information. That, in the course of the time they passed together in inquiring into and discussing the true interests of their country, they must have acquired very accurate knowledge on that head. That they were individually interested in the public liberty and prosperity, and therefore that it was not less their inclination than their duty to recommend only such measures as, after the most mature deliberation, they really thought prudent and advisable.

These and similar considerations then induced the people to rely greatly on the judgment and integrity of that Congress; and they took their advice, notwithstanding the various arts and endeavors used to deter them from it. But if the people at large had reason to confide in the men of that Congress, few of whom had been fully tried or generally known, one might think that they have now greater reason to respect the judgment and advice of the present Congress of 2015, but alas!, such is not the case, for it is well known that some of the most distinguished members of this current Congress, are as corrupt a group of power-seeking men as can be found anywhere in the world, claiming to have patriotism and our best interests in mind, while growing old and fat on the stolen rights of our people, all the while using the acquired political information and accumulated knowledge and experience they gain in the national government to fatten their wallets and increase their own special interests.

It is worthy of remark that not only the first, but every succeeding Congress, have invariably joined with the people in thinking that the prosperity of America depended on its Union. To preserve and perpetuate it was the great object of the people in forming both the convention that produced the decentralized and free Articles of Confederation and the convention that produced that grotesquely centralized national government document known as the United States Constitution, and it is also the great object of the new plan, the New Articles of Confederation, which all men of wisdom are advising the people of the several States to adopt. With what propriety, therefore, or for what good purposes, are attempts at this particular period made by some men to depreciate the importance of the Union? Or why is it suggested that three or four confederacies would be better than one? I am persuaded in my own mind that the people have always thought right on this subject, and that their universal and uniform attachment to the cause of the Union rests on great and weighty reasons, which I shall endeavor to develop and explain in some ensuing papers. On the one hand, they who promote the Union through the continuance of the national government are striving to force the people to give up what is left of their remaining freedoms, liberties and rights, and do so to keep themselves glutting on the labors of the people.  They make the claim that we should be a Union under the Constitution simply for the sake of Union, as if Union alone was the object.  But do we want to be a Union of slaves or a Union of freemen?  So, Union for the sake of Union is not the end goal.  It must be a free, unforced, voluntary Union, such as is had under the NAC plan.  On the other hand, they who promote the idea of substituting a number of distinct confederacies in the room of the NAC plan of one free Confederacy, seem to know that there efforts are not as popular as the NAC plan and will only end up diluting the promotion of both the NAC plan and any other Confederacy plan, and thus they seem clearly to foresee that the rejection of the NAC would secure forever the continuance of the slave Union under the Constitution.  In other words, both parties are apparently working from opposite ends and ideologies, yet secretly have the same end goal in mind: the elimination of any chance at a free Union under the NAC and the perpetual establishment of an American Union under a totalitarian state.  That certainly would be the case if the NAC plan does not pass, and I sincerely wish that it may be as clearly foreseen by every good citizen, that if ever the time arrives that the voice of the people buries the efforts to promote and install the NAC, America will have reason to exclaim, in the words of the poet: “FAREWELL! A LONG FAREWELL TO ALL MY POTENTIAL GREATNESS.”

A CONFEDERALIST

P.S.  My illustrious compatriot desires to dictate an appendage, to which I have consented:

The continuance of this United States government under the Constitution will not meliorate our own particular system. I beg leave to consider the circumstances of the Union antecedent to the meeting of the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia. We were told of phantoms and ideal dangers to lead us into Constitutional measures which have been, in my opinion, the ruin of our country. If the existence of those dangers has not been historically proved, if there has been no apprehension of wars, if there has been no rumors of wars, it will place the subject in a different light, and plainly evince to the world that there really was no reason for adopting the Constitutional measures which we apprehended to be ruinous and destructive. When this state [Virginia] proposed that the general (confederal) government should be improved, Massachusetts was just recovered from a rebellion which had brought the republic to the brink of destruction, from a rebellion which was crushed by that federal government which was then so much contemned and abhorred.

A vote of that August body for fifteen hundred men, aided by the exertions of the state, silenced all opposition, and shortly restored the public tranquility. Massachusetts was satisfied that these internal commotions were so happily settled, and was unwilling to risk any similar distresses by theoretic experiments. Were the Eastern States willing to enter into the Constitutional measure? Were they willing to accede to the proposal of Virginia? In what manner was it received? Connecticut revolted at the idea. The Eastern States, sir, were unwilling to recommend a meeting of a Constitutional convention. They were well aware of the dangers of revolutions and changes. Why was every effort used, and such uncommon pains taken, to bring it about? This would have been unnecessary, had it been approved of by the people. Was Pennsylvania disposed for the reception of that Constitutional project of reformation?

No, sir. She was even unwilling to amend her revenue laws, so as to make the five per centum operative. She was satisfied with things as they were, in their Confederacy state under the Articles of Confederation. There was no complaint, that ever I heard of, from any other part of the Union, except Virginia. This being the case among ourselves, what dangers were there to be apprehended from foreign nations? It will be easily shown that dangers from that quarter were absolutely imaginary. Was not France friendly? Unequivocally so. She was devising new regulations of commerce for our advantage. Did she harass us with applications for her money? Was it likely that France would quarrel with us? Was it not reasonable to suppose that she would be more desirous than ever to cling, after losing the Dutch republic, to her best ally? How were the Dutch? We owed them money, it is true; and were they not willing that we should owe them more? Mr. [John] Adams applied to them for a new loan to the poor, despised Confederation. They readily granted it. The Dutch have a fellow-feeling for us. They were in the same situation with ourselves.

I believe that the money which the Dutch borrowed of Henry IV was not ever paid. How did they pass Queen Elizabeth’s loan? At a very considerable discount. They took advantage of the weakness and necessities of James I, and made their own terms with that contemptible monarch. Loans from nations are not like loans from private men. Nations lend money, and grant assistance, to one another, from views of national interest — France was willing to pluck the fairest feather out of the British crown. This was her object in aiding us. She would not quarrel with us on pecuniary considerations. Congress considered it in this point of view; for when a proposition was made to make it a debt of private persons, it was rejected without hesitation. That respectable body wisely considered, that, while we remained their debtors in so considerable a degree, they would not be inattentive to our interest.

With respect to Spain, she was friendly in a high degree. I wish to know by whose interposition was the treaty with Morocco made. Was it not by that of the king of Spain? Several predatory nations disturbed us, on going into the Mediterranean. The influence of Charles III at the Barbary court, and four thousand pounds, procured as good a treaty with Morocco as could be expected. But I acknowledge it was not of any consequence, since the Algerines and people of Tunis did not enter into similar measures. We had nothing to fear from Spain; and, were she ever hostile, she could never be formidable to this country. Her strength was so scattered, that she never could be dangerous to us either in peace or war. As to Portugal, we had a treaty with her, which might have been very advantageous, though it had not yet been ratified.

The domestic debt was diminished by considerable sales of western lands to Cutler, Sergeant, and Company; to Simms; and to Royal, Flint, and Company. The board of treasury was authorized to sell in Europe, or any where else, the residue of those lands.

An act of Congress was passed, to adjust the public debts between the individual states and the United States.

Was our trade in a despicable situation? I shall say nothing of what did not come under my own historical observation. In that Congress, sixteen vessels had had sea letters in the East India trade, and two hundred vessels entered and cleared out, in the French West India Islands, in one year.

I must confess that public credit had suffered, and that our public creditors had been ill used. This was owing to a fault at the head-quarters — to Congress themselves — in not selling the western lands at an earlier period. If requisitions had not been complied with, it must have been owing to Congress, who might have put the unpopular debts on the back lands. Commutation was abhorrent to New England ideas. Speculation was abhorrent to the Eastern States. Those inconveniences had resulted from the bad policy of Congress.

I list all of this historical data which we had under the original Articles of Confederation to show that we were not as bad off under that document as was made to be seen and it surely was much better than under the United States Constitution.  But the New Articles of Confederation (NAC) is orders of magnitude better than both and should be enacted right away.

There are certain modes of governing the people which will succeed. There are others which will not. The idea of consolidation was, and still should be, abhorrent to the people of this country. How were the sentiments of the people before the meeting of the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia? They had only one object in view. Their ideas reached no farther than to give the general (confederal) government the five per centum impost, and the regulation of trade. When it was agitated in Congress, in a committee of the whole, this was all that was asked, or was deemed necessary. Since that period, their views have extended much farther. Horrors have been greatly magnified since the rising of the Constitutional Convention.

We were told by the honorable gentleman (Governor Randolph) that we should have wars and rumors of wars, that every calamity was to attend us, and that we should be ruined and disunited forever, unless we adopted the United States Constitution. Pennsylvania and Maryland were to fall upon us from the north, like the Goths and Vandals of old; the Algerines, whose flat-sided vessels never came farther than Madeira, were to fill the Chesapeake with mighty fleets, and to attack us on our front; the Indians were to invade us with numerous armies on our rear, in order to convert our cleared lands into hunting- grounds; and the Carolinians, from the south, (mounted on alligators, I presume,) were to come and destroy our cornfields, and eat up our little children! These, sir, were the mighty dangers which awaited us if we rejected dangers which were merely imaginary, and ludicrous in the extreme! Were we to be destroyed by Maryland and Pennsylvania? What would democratic states make war for, and how long since have they imbibed a hostile spirit?

But the generality were to attack us. Would they attack us after violating their faith in the first Union? Would they not violate their faith if they did not take us into their confederacy? Had they not agreed, by the old Confederation, that the Union should be perpetual, and that no alteration should take place without the consent of Congress, and the confirmation of the legislatures of every state? I cannot think that there is such depravity in mankind as that, after violating public faith so flagrantly, they should make war upon us, also, for not following their example.

The large states had divided the back lands among themselves, and had given as much as they thought proper to the generality. For the fear of disunion, we were told that we ought to take measures which we otherwise should not. Disunion was impossible. The Eastern States held the fisheries, which were their cornfields, by a hair. They had a dispute with the British government about their limits that lasted a long time. Was not a general and strong government necessary for their interest? If ever nations had inducements to peace, the Eastern States certainly had. New York and Pennsylvania anxiously looked forward for the fur trade. How could they obtain it but by union? Could the western posts be got or retained without union? How were the little states inclined? They were not likely to disunite. Their weakness would prevent them from quarreling. Little men were seldom fond of quarreling among giants. was there not a strong inducement to union, while the British were on one side and the Spaniards on the other? Thank Heaven, we had a Carthage of our own I . . .

But what would I do on the present occasion to remedy the existing defects of the former Confederation and the current Constitution? There are two opinions prevailing in the world — the one, that mankind can only be governed by force; the other, that they are capable of freedom and a good government. Under a supposition that mankind can govern themselves, I would recommend that the proposed New Articles of Confederation be adopted.  Remove from Congress the regulation of commerce. Infuse new strength and spirit into the state governments; for, when the component parts are strong, it will give energy to the government, although it be otherwise weak….

Get rid of all the public debts and start clean slated.  Aid the foreign interest by loans.  Keep on so till the American character be marked with some certain, NAC-peculiar features. The settlement of new countries on our western frontiers has already occurred and we have become able to deal with the continual migration of people from Europe and from everywhere else.  Now that these obstacles have been removed, we can with greater prospect of success, devise changes, in the form of the NAC plan. We are not too young to know what we are fit for.  Now is the exact and proper time to make new experiments in government, by returning to a Confederacy under the NAC.  We ought to consider, as Montesquieu says, whether the construction of the government be suitable to the genius and disposition of the people, as well as a variety of other circumstances.

ANOTHER CONFEDERALIST

Brought to you by CINAC [pronounced Ki-NACK] – The Coalition for the Installation of the New Articles of Confederation

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The USC Sucks, etcetera: Part 13 of an Open Debate—The NAC’s Article XIII (The Rules of the League)


Altering the pact

Article XIII. Section 1.  Every State shall abide by the determination of the united States in congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them, unless such alteration be agreed to by the voice of the citizens of the several States, for as it was the voice of the citizens of the several States that ordained these articles as the league pact for the States of this Confederacy, neither the several State legislatures and governors, nor the united States in Congress assembled, shall have power to alter these articles in any way, for such power and authority is reserved solely to the citizens of the several States, who shall wield it by their voice at whatsoever time they see fit.

Once the New Articles of Confederation (NAC) have been installed as the Supreme Law of the land, those who have been deposed of their positions of power in the former national government, and those who were seeking such positions, will unite in an effort to amend or alter the NAC to either bring the Confederacy back to a national government or otherwise to consolidate power into a singular head which can act as a king or as a president exercising kingly authority over men.  These men will prefer to alter or amend the NAC by a Congressional vote or by a vote of the State legislatures, because both Congress and the State legislatures are smaller groups of people than the general populace, and it is easier to bribe with money or promises of power, benefit and gain the 540 or so members of Congress, or the State legislatures, than the entire population.  The NAC anticipates an immediate push for amendment or alteration by these people, but puts this right squarely in the hands of the people of the States, making it impossible for it to be corrupted through closed-door deals.  Thus, conspiring men will have to convince more than half of the American people that altering the NAC is in their best interest.  The chances of that happening are slim to none.

It is possible to transfer an already captured bird from a smaller bird cage to a larger one or from a larger bird cage to a smaller one, for the captured bird is already accustomed to being in a cage and, being confined, can be fairly easily corralled into the new more confining, or less confining, cage.  In like manner, it is possible to cause a people living under an oppressive government to accept the alteration of the government into a more oppressive, or less oppressive, form, for the people are already accustomed to living under an oppressive government, and more oppression or less oppression are just degrees of what they are already used to.  In other words, the situation hasn’t drastically changed, thus the behavior of the people won’t drastically change, either.  But when you free the bird entirely from the cage, allowing it to fly off into the wild blue yonder, you’ve drastically altered conditions and no amount of coaxing will get the bird back in a cage.  Once out, it’s gone.  Similarly, if a people go from an oppressive government to a free government, it is next to impossible to get them to choose of their own free will to go back into oppression.  Once they’ve been acclimated to freedom, the only way to get them back under your thumb is through force of arms.

The NAC establishes a free government, not merely a less oppressive one than the former national government.  For this reason the push to alter the NAC must come almost immediately after its passage, before the population has time to acclimate to the new free environment.  I suppose the threat of war, through an exterior invasion, will be used as a fearmongering tool to try to cause the people to alter the NAC so that a president and standing army can be allowed, perhaps under the false guise of a “temporary measure.”  Whatever the strategy, these efforts to alter must come soon after the installment of the NAC.  If they wait too long, the people will never be able to be tricked into giving up their freedom and liberties again.

This section, then, is a safeguard against the re-establishment of tyranny and oppression in America.

The rules of the club

Article XIII.

Section 2.  All of the fifty States of the previous union, which was formed under the United States Constitution, are invited to enter this league by sending authorized delegates to the gathering at Liberty Bell at the day and time which has been appointed to sign them, and such signing will enter them; but if any of these fifty States neglect to send delegates at that time, yet desire to be admitted into the league afterward, they shall be admitted by the voice of the citizens of their States, first, by the voice of Congress, second, and upon them sending authorized delegates to sign the pact, third, all within a year’s time.

Section 3.  Apart from the fifty States which were united under the United States Constitution, no foreign State or nation shall be admitted into this league, except by the voice of the citizens of the several States, and the voice of Congress, and the voice of the citizens of said foreign State or nation, all within a year’s time; and if the voice of all these is for admittance, the foreign State or nation shall send authorized delegates to sign the pact before the year’s time has expired, and thus shall be admitted; but no foreign State or nation shall be admitted that has a king over men, or that exerts kingly authority over them, or that in any way violates these articles.

Section 4.  No State shall be removed from this Confederacy, except by the voice of Congress and the voice of the citizens of the several States, all within a year’s time. Any State which has been removed from this league shall be considered a foreign State and treated as such; and if the removed State requests re-admittance, the third section of this article shall apply.

The Confederacy established by the NAC is a free league, of free States.  Any State can voluntarily enter the league, and voluntarily exit it, whenever they want.  Peaceful provisions are provided to that end, making a repeat of the Civil War, or War Between the States, highly unlikely.  However, owing that the league is to be of free States, oppressive ones that exercise kingly authority over their people, and also monarchies, are banned from it.  This Confederacy is not to be patterned after the United Nations, allowing all sorts of oppressive regimes in, but an exclusive club of free governments.  If any nation does not make the grade, they are barred from entering.  If any member State turns oppressive, they can be kicked out.  The NAC does not play favorites and no State is indispensable.

Installing the NAC

Once America has decided to install the NAC, the only text that needs to be altered are the dates listed in the Preamble and Conclusion,

Preamble

Whereas the Delegates of Fifty of the United States of America in Congress assembled at Liberty Bell, Independence National Historical Park, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, did on the fifteenth day of November in the Year of our Lord Two Thousand Fifteen, and in the Two Hundred Thirty-Ninth Year of the Independence of America, agree to certain new articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the sovereign, free and independent States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ohio, Nebraska, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, and West Virginia, in the words following, viz:

New articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ohio, Nebraska, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, and West Virginia.

Conclusion

In Witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands in Congress. Done at Philadelphia in the State of Pennsylvania the ninth day of July in the Year of our Lord two thousand Sixteen, and in the two hundred Fortieth Year of the independence of America.

and also the listing of the States, according to which States choose to enter the pact.  Everything else can and should remain untouched, just as it is written now.  This allows for very easy installation, as whatever date chosen only needs to be one that occurs after the election and on a day and time that the Liberty Bell park is open to the public.

Peaceful government transitions codified

Article XIII. Section 5.  Recognizing that the Confederacy derives its powers from its constituent States, and that each State derives its Powers from its people, should the citizens of any of the member States of this Confederacy decide, by their voice, with or without the approval of their State government officials, to abolish the government of their State, or to remove their State from the Confederacy, or to revert their State to the previous form of government as a British Colony, or to alter their republican form of State government into some other form, this Confederacy shall acknowledge their decision as legitimate, valid, effective, final and binding, and shall consider them and their lands as no longer residing within the jurisdictional bounds of, and no longer part of, the Confederacy; and should they choose removal from the Confederacy, they shall be viewed as a free and independent State; and should they choose anarchism, they shall be viewed as a free and independent people and Territory; and should they choose to revert to British rule, they shall be viewed as part of Great Britain; and should they choose some other form of government, they shall be viewed as a foreign entity and nation.

The NAC includes the right to peacefully abolish, revert and replace, which is essentially the same text of the proposed amendment attached to the NAC, which amendment will allow the NAC to be installed.  As good a law as the NAC is, being far superior to the United States Constitution, or any other man-made law found throughout the world, this does not preclude the future existence of something even better, of ever greater wisdom, therefore the NAC provides for this contingency, too.

Final Conclusion of the 13 Parts

These thirteen essays adequately show the superiority of the New Articles of Confederation to the United States Constitution, demonstrating to America that the Constitution is not the be-all and end-all of laws.  It certainly served its purposes for more than 200 years, and as far as man-made laws go, it was one of the most innovative, and far ahead of its time.  But it is an old man and it is time to put it to rest.  Nevertheless, the principles in the Constitution, which were not man-made, namely, the Bill of Rights, are carried over into the new plan (the NAC), for these were inspired of God, and must not be set aside.  And they have been expanded in the NAC, as if in an unabridged form.  Also, a few of the Constitutional innovations have been retained in the NAC.  But, other than that, the NAC is a new tool for a new millennium, to combat and eradicate a new group of tyrants and tyrannies, the march of which the Constitution has been unable to stop or even slow down.  But that is okay, because now there is the NAC, and it is fully armed and ready to deal with the current and future environments of tyranny.  So, let’s let go of the Constitution and replace it with the NAC.  Let’s let the NAC do its tyranny-destroying thing.  As it is unwise to enter a gunfight armed with only a knife, why should we fight the tyranny and oppression of today with a 200+ year law that the enemy has already figured out how to by-pass and corrupt?  That route only leads to defeat, slavery and totalitarianism.  The NAC offers an alternative future, one of victory, freedom and the destruction of tyranny.  It does so by offering a proper tool, one meet for the task at hand, even a modern tool for a modern problem, which, strangely enough, is really a set of exceedingly ancient principles, far older than the Constitution.  So the NAC is new only in the sense that we have never seen its like before, but in reality it is an older, extremely strong, street-wise man, who has been around the block more times than we can count, and the Constitution is the relatively new kid who is getting beat up by the neighborhood bullies.  The NAC man has returned from his lengthy walkabout and now sees and targets the bullies.  He’s ready and poised to kick some major bully butt.  Do we put forth our hand to hold the NAC back and say, “No.  Let the bullies continue to destroy the little kid.”  Of course not.  We pull up a chair, grab a bag of popcorn, and watch the action fly, cheering as the bullies get their comeuppance.

Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

To read the other parts of this series, click any of these links:

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,

Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10,

Part 11, Part 12, Part 13.

Also see: The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) and The Right to Abolish, Revert and Replace Amendment.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The U.S. Constitution (USC) Sucks, The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) is Better: Part 6 of an Open Debate—NAC’s Article IV Confederacy vs. USC’s National Government


From the Articles of Confederation entry on Wikipedia:

On January 21, 1786, the Virginia Legislature, following James Madison’s recommendation, invited all the states to send delegates to Annapolis, Maryland to discuss ways to reduce interstate conflict. At what came to be known as the Annapolis Convention, the few state delegates in attendance endorsed a motion that called for all states to meet in Philadelphia in May 1787 to discuss ways to improve the Articles of Confederation in a “Grand Convention.” Although the states’ representatives to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were only authorized to amend the Articles, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution.

So, they were supposed to fix the Articles of Confederation (AOC) but the nationalists among them decided to scrap the Confederacy that the AOC established and write something new, without authorization from their States, which thing would create a national government.  Most Americans say, “So, what?  The U. S. Constitution (USC) is the greatest political document in the world.”

You must look at the Constitution in this way

Those who defend the USC do so without understanding, for they do not separate the USC, which was written by the nationalists, from the Bill of Rights, which was a product of the minds of the federalists.  The nationalists who wrote the USC in secret wanted to impose a strong national (centrist) government upon the States and saw no need for a Bill of Rights to protect the people from the monster they were creating.  In fact, they argued that having a Bill of Rights would be bad!  Luckily, (or speaking more truthfully), by divine grace, God inspired the federalists to insist upon a Bill of Rights, which were added as the first 10 Amendments.  But the nationalists ever thought their creation (the USC) was perfect as is, without the Bill of Rights.

When you look at history, think about how abusive the national government has been, encroaching on the rights of the people just about every chance it has had.   Now, think about what is the only thing that has somewhat checked these tyrannical abuses of power.  Has it not been the Bill of Rights?  Yes, of course it has.  Now, imagine how history would have been different had those nationalist conspirators—who usurped their delegated States’ authority and wrote the USC in secret—had their way, and released it upon the American people without a Bill of Rights.  Can you imagine the horrors we would have had from the very beginning?  We see horrors among us today and say that the government has grown too large and too centralized, but this growth took hundreds of years to occur because of the restraints the Bill of Rights put upon government.  Without the Bill of Rights, government would have ballooned overnight and the horrors we see today would have existed two hundred years ago.

When you look at the USC, then, you must see it as its creators saw it: sans a Bill of Rights and about as perfect as mortal man could make it.  And that, in fact, is the problem with the USC.  It is man-made law, which God has said brings men into bondage, for this is what the laws of men have always done and been designed to do: to bring men into all types of bondage, so that men can rule over their fellow man and enrich themselves with other men’s goods.

So, all those who extoll the virtues of the USC are not praising the USC, for there is nothing particularly good about it, but their praise is for the Bill of Rights, which is cause for celebration.  And that is the part that was inspired of God.  For God needed to restrain this thing that had been created in secret, for a time, until, when it became the behemoth it now is, gobbling up every right and power it can find, God could work a work of restoration and bring us back to where we first went awry.

The NAC is a reset

It was always the intention of God that those delegates fix the AOC, but they didn’t do it.  So, God is going to fix the AOC with the NAC (or something like it), because God’s purposes are never frustrated.  In the end, He always get what He wants.  In this case, we are going to be taken back to a Confederacy, as if we were transported back in time to May 1787.  It is going to be as if those unfaithful delegates actually did their appointed job and corrected the AOC under inspiration of God.  It is going to be as if the USC never existed (save for all the history we had under it).  It will be a complete reset.

A Confederacy is superior to a National Government

The NAC’s Confederacy has token similarities to the national government established by the USC.  There is a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives.  There are two Senators per State and multiple Representatives per population apportionment.  But that is pretty much where the similarities end.

In essence the NAC is a pure Confederacy of States.  The Congress represents the States and their interests, not the people.  No one is popularly elected, like under the USC, but all are appointed by the State governments.  Nevertheless, there is interaction with the people because they (the people) get to approve or disapprove of all those appointments.  This corresponds, basically, to the law of common consent.  Thus, the NAC’s Confederacy has perfect legitimacy on all levels.

Unlike the USC, which has enormous powers, the NAC’s Confederacy has extremely limited powers that deal with State issues.  The Confederacy is mainly concerned with defense, but also has power to make treaties, regulate the border crossings of foreigners, provide a sound monetary source, a post office, resolve disputes between States, and little else.  This Confederacy, in fact, might seem weak on the surface, but it makes for an extremely dynamic and diverse society, which is fully protected from any foe, whether foreign or domestic.

The so-called “dynamic” American economy currently under the USC is but the symbol or shadow of the economy that would exist literally under the NAC.  The USC has the economy under a whole lot of restraints at present, yet it still chugs along “dynamically” (so-called).  The NAC, though, unleashes the full American economy, freeing it from its restraints, allowing the Lord to finally give the Gentiles a taste of what the Nephites had.  Everything becomes, or will become, literally dynamic, on all levels, in a never-ending spiral of (non-miraculous) prosperity.  (And yet, even this won’t be what God has in store for us.  But you have to start somewhere, right?  So, the NAC shouldn’t be considered the prosperity miracle, but just a set-up for the prosperity miracle which is to come.)

Again, the national government under the USC restrains, while the Confederacy under the NAC will set all things free of restraints.  Yet it also will keep us safe and secure, so there is no trade-off.  We need not choose between the security of the USC and the freedom of the NAC.  The NAC will secure us more fully than the USC does and will also give us greater freedoms, so it is superior to the USC on literally every point.

Secret combinations, political parties and special interests

Do you remember what happened a mere five years after king Mosiah did away with the monarchy and established a system of judges?  Sure, the people rejoiced in their new-found freedom, but a certain set of men were ticked off at this change of events because there was no longer a centralized position of power in the government from which to rule over men.  They wanted to be kings over men, but they couldn’t because king Mosiah changed the dang laws!  Everything was too decentralized for power hungry people to be able to control anything.  So, just five years into the reign of the judges, Amlici of the Nehors appeared on the scene:

And it came to pass in the commencement of the fifth year of their reign there began to be a contention among the people; for a certain man, being called Amlici, he being a very cunning man, yea, a wise man as to the wisdom of the world, he being after the order of the man that slew Gideon by the sword, who was executed according to the law—now this Amlici had, by his cunning, drawn away much people after him; even so much that they began to be very powerful; and they began to endeavor to establish Amlici to be a king over the people.  (Alma 2:1-2)

In like manner, there are to be wicked and conspiring men among the Gentiles:

Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you:

In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—  (D&C 89:4)

These same conspiring men, who have genetically modified our food, who have poisoned our water supplies, who have conspired to put toxic chemicals into our bodies and the bodies of our children, in the name of science and medicine, who have promoted sexual liberation and abortion that they might be able to farm human body parts (of the aborted children), etc., all for gain, fame, honors of men and power, these very same men (and also women) have a vested interest in the national government, for although it is not a monarchy with a king, it still nevertheless represents kingly authority over men, which is what these conspiring men need and desire in order for them to obtain their riches and dominion over men.

So, it should not come as a surprise that there will be intense opposition to the NAC once it starts to gain traction among the people.  And it should not come as a surprise that even after the NAC (or something like it) is installed as the Supreme Law of the land, that just a short time afterward there will be calls for it to be changed into something that allows for either a king-type of office or kingly authority over men.  In other words, these same men aren’t going to go away without a fight, and even after their power and control is taken away from them by the NAC, they will use every means in their power to re-gain the lost ground and powerful positions they had, even if it means conspiring with our enemies to wage war against America, to bring it back to a national government.

This means that on the one hand the NAC will destroy secret combinations and conspiring men, during the time that it is the law, but on the other hand, so all-pervasively destructive will the NAC be to tyranny that all would-be tyrants will be forced to use excessive measures to restore their thrones, so war will be inevitable under the NAC.  There will be forces both within our borders and also outside of them trying to take the NAC out.  Even if the conspirators in this country are all arrested and put down, the conspirators in other countries will not sit idly by and watch the great prize of America be literally snatched from their fingers by the NAC.

The NAC foresees all of this

Although it could be technically correct to say that the NAC’s Confederacy is weaker than the national government under the USC, the powers vested in the Confederacy by the NAC are specific and sufficiently powerful to deal with these conspiring enemies of the people.  The NAC already foresees that such secret combinations will exist, and that they will attempt to destroy the NAC and return the people to the USC, or to bring about an even stronger government, such as a world government, and the NAC plans for these conspiracies.  In other words, although the specific powers of the Confederacy are extremely limited, they are also extremely powerful and perfectly requisite in dealing with all enemies whether foreign and domestic.  Even if the entire world conspires against America under the NAC, and decides to wage war against us, the NAC provides for this contingency and will be able to see us through it.

The USC’s national government has no power to restrain conspirators

In contrast, the national government under the USC is a breeding ground for conspiring men and corruption.  Not only is there a continual push to consolidate all power under the executive branch (the President), for that is the office that most closely matches a king, but all branches of government routinely grab at whatsoever new power and authority they can steal from the people, representing the continuous manifestation of kingly authority over men.  Additionally, although having a real king would be magnificent to these evil people, they would really love to have a world king, and so they also push for world government and to do away altogether with the sovereign nation-state.  These things happen, or can happen, under the USC, because it is man-made and has no foresight whatsoever.  In other words, fore-sight comes of the Spirit of freedom, even the Holy Ghost, which is the spirit of prophecy and revelation.  Man-made documents can’t see the future and so must just guess as to what is actually needed.  Most times these guesses are all wrong because of the change in conditions that inevitably comes, which no one ever saw coming.

The USC doesn’t provide for conspiring men because why should it?  It was crafted by conspiracy and conspiring men, after all!  Why in the world would conspiring men put safeguards in the very document they are creating to make it impossible for conspiring men to take control?  The USC, then, as a creation of conspiring men, was designed to be a vehicle that could be used to control the States, not to free them or the people.  (The Bill of Rights, on the other hand, was designed to be a vehicle that could be used to control the USC.)  The USC didn’t make the States or their people any freer than they already were under the AOC.  Its sole function was to consolidate stolen State power in the hands of a few men (Congress, the Justices and the President) under the guise as this would make us safer or more protected, militarily, and also more prosperous if commerce could be regulated.

But all of this was just false propaganda playing on men’s fears.  This is even the tactic used by evil men today.  If you can instill a false fear in the population, you can make them give up anything, even their rights and privileges.

The NAC keeps State rights intact, the USC doesn’t

The States are sovereign and were ever meant to be.  Contrary to what people might think, God does not approve of sameness.  He likes diversity.  Thus a male is a male and a female is a female.  They are not designed or intended to be unisex, or the same.  Diversity is the name of the game in the divine economy of God.  “Sovereign States in a Confederacy” creates diversity among the States.  They become more nation-like under a Confederacy, while under a national government there is a certain conformity that takes place with much less diversity and no sovereignty.  The rights and independence and sovereignty of the States is fully intact under the NAC.  They can freely enter the pact and freely leave it, all done peacefully.

Not so under the USC.  The national government is over the States, just as kings were over men.  It is the same principle.  The national government, then, exerts kingly authority over the States and also over their people.  When a State tries to break away, we end up having a civil war or a war between the States.  Thus, the national government doesn’t give a hoot about the States or their people.  The Feds are in charge and as each day passes, they are more and more in charge, stealing authorities from both the States and their people.

But make no mistake about it, the States are just as tyrannical as the national government, and those in State governments are also trying to do what the Feds are doing, creating their own police state and trying to consolidate what they can steal from the people, under their own authority.  This is why the NAC doesn’t just abolish the national government, but also restrains the States from exerting kingly authority over men, like the national government does.

A final word

One more thing about Article IV that makes it stand out is the fact that Congress under the NAC is paid by their respective States.  In other words, Congress under the NAC won’t be able to vote themselves a pay raise.  Some States will pay more and some States will pay less, to their respective Representatives and Senators.  Thus, each State will get what it pays for.

In my next installment I will discuss Article V, which covers monetary issues.  Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

To read the other parts of this series, click any of these links:

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,

Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10,

Part 11, Part 12, Part 13.

Also see: The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) and The Right to Abolish, Revert and Replace Amendment.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist