Tyler Durden is a frequent contributor at Zero Hedge. Today he writes about secessionist tendencies rising out of our current extreme political polarization. He surmises the losing side in next month's election will perceive themselves to be the victims of chicanery.
Durden makes a point we've made, the antidote to secession is extreme federalism. If we could decide to let virtually all laws not dealing with foreign affairs or interstate commerce be decided at the state and/or local level, secessionist tendencies would likely fade away.
Since the Viet Nam War ended, our bitter disagreements tend not to be about foreign affairs and defense. Why shouldn't states have differing laws about, say, abortion or transgender rights? Or about concealed carrying of firearms, for that matter?
Doing extreme federalism might mean backing away from the Bill of Rights to some degree. Free speech and banning 'hate' speech appear mutually exclusive to this observer. I can imagine states which would like to, for example, ban pistols or perhaps ban all privately owned firearms.
Upon further reflection, the constitutional changes necessary to accomplish a degree of extreme federalism acceptable to most Americans are probably impossible to achieve within our legal system's checks and balances (which often constitute hurdles). Durden concludes:
Unless Americans have a change of heart and begin to decentralize the political system, expect a growing unwillingness to accept the outcomes of national elections and growing resistance to the federal government in general. What follows is unlikely to be pleasant.
