Since Lincoln’s time, Americans have not experienced a government that is truly of and by the people—one based on consent and choice. Instead, we have faced a top-down government characterized by forced obedience and federal supremacy; a system that is destructive to the principles of self-government and replaces them with centralized bureaucracies that increasingly abuse their power, become more entrenched, and exploit ordinary citizens. Attempting to work within the system of national parties will never get us anywhere if we desire self-government. We must flip the system on its head, and cannot fight their way on their chosen field under their assumptions; we must change tactics. We must abolish the great political evils of our day, centralization and national political parties. This can only work by empowering local leaders to resist top-down enforced conformity and oppression.
I would like to present an “end goal” and a political scenario that could restore self-governance to Americans and undo the evils ingrained in our original system and imposed on us by Lincoln and all those who came after.
Restore States’ Rights?
I have been a big advocate for decentralized power, which in our American context has been connected to “states’ rights.” Giving choice back to the people of the states, and allowing them to decide their own affairs rather than having decisions imposed at the federal level, is always a good thing. But it no longer carries the same meaning and purpose or brings the same results as it once did. The early American colonies, and later the states, had similar religion, culture, and thus politics. Each state was made up of largely coherent blocs of like-minded people. Today the states have become much more diverse. Changes in politics, culture, racial demographics, beliefs and far more besides have caused a rupture in the localized “old-fashioned” way of life that kept coalitions of similar people together. People now seek to “find themselves,” travel the country, leave for job opportunities elsewhere or go to college across the nation, and families are separated and displaced. The population drift and overall increase make managing these states as blocs of like-minded people impossible.
Texas has a population of over 31 million people. The entire population of the United States at ratification of the Constitution was under three million! It took until the Civil War before the population of all the states together equaled that of Texas today. If we had told the people at the time of the ratification of the Constitution, or as the Civil War commenced, that 31 million people would be forced to live under the same state government, they would lock us up in an insane asylum. You cannot manage that many people under one state government.
I met with conservative and libertarian members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Texas, yet the county they were in, and others near them in Houston, were very radically progressive. States that we label “conservative” have, in fact, very liberal counties within them. Why force these separate counties to be at war within the state to decide policy? Is that not the same as what Lincoln forced on the states by having the federal government decide? We now do the same at the state level by pitting counties against each other.
Thus, if we can hand back to the states much of what the federal government does, it is an improvement, but in today’s society, it will just cause mini-fights at the state rather than the federal level. Which while not ideal is better, and is also how should it be legally done within the framework of American history. However, to achieve what our decentralized Union prior to Lincoln was meant to do, today we must make governance even more localized, where true diversity could blossom; that is, at the county level.
The Confederated Counties Of America
We must go more local and abolish the “states” as we know them and hand governance over to local county control. Every decision, and all authority that was previously held at the state and county level, would now rest solely at the county level. This would also rid us of a layer of bureaucracy, politicians, political parties, and taxation. Now we would have only the local county-level control and the federal.
Next, we would slowly transfer various decisions still done at the federal level and give those choices back to the counties, thus decentralizing power and authority back to the people at the local level, allowing us to decide our own government and laws at a reasonable scale to create a unified whole, within which people can select the policies of their choice.
We could create thousands of self-governing counties of like-minded people. One county might be conservative, the next liberal, the next communist, the next libertarian, and so on. Each county would maintain sovereignty within its sphere, create its own policy, and enact it. People could move to the county of their choice and live under the laws of their choosing. This would remove much of the antagonism, hatred, and other ills derived from majority democratically-elected rule, and end that great evil of centralized control and forced conformity, which places citizens politically at war with each other; all while achieving the level of self-government that the Founders and the Southern Confederacy of 1861 desired.
Deeper Dive
We now have only a “federal” level government and a “local” level. However, it is the local that superseded the federal. Sovereignty and ultimate authority would now rest entirely with the people of the counties, with each county having complete say over its own policies and able to enact any laws it desires without interference from outside forces, including the federal government. Also, meaning secession is forever legal and available to every county at any time in the future. Any county can leave and form its own independent country if it so desires.
All counties would be equal in all things and lack any sort of power to impose their ways on other counties. Further, counties could not expand or take over another. Even if two adopt the same laws, they still would be in all ways separate and autonomous, not merged. In this system, the totalitarian community is just as free to live in the way they desire as a libertarian society. Everyone has the perfect ability to control their own destiny. Between the realms, there would be no need for strife, hatred, anger, discord, etc., since each section is powerless to impose its ways on another.
To further foster self-governance, a list is drawn up comprising numerous possible governmental systems, created by professors, judges, think tanks, political party leaders, news hosts, historians, theologians, philosophers, and other influencers and laypeople (this list can always be added to by anyone). Then, every adult who wants to move to these new societies votes for the preferred system. Land is then given from the previously owned “state” and federal lands (the federal government owns around 28% of the American land mass) to these various groups, who create new autonomous counties under their own agreed-upon laws, charters, constitutions, etc., similar to Native American reservations. This could be repeated as needed.
The federal government is no longer involved with foreign aid or foreign war of any sort (except to repel invasion on our soil), and so the money used for such ventures can be transferred to help initiate and develop (and help people and businesses move) to these new communities until all are fulfilled. Meaning there should be a county for nearly every political opinion or desire. The goal is to achieve thousands of united wholes where people can live within their chosen society, customs, laws, race, religions, and with people who also desire to be with them. Those who desire to live with those they disagree with, and fight it out politically with diverse groups as we now do, can also do the same in their own counties.
Associations (“States”)
While many counties might likely never join in any associations or confederacy, various confederacies of counties could form, disperse, and change over time. Since each county is sovereign, it can choose to join or not join with other counties to work together for a common goal. They can delegate specified roles to the associations of counties and can reclaim those powers at any time. One county, we will call Smith County, may decide to join eight others to build roads or for military defense and militia training. In contrast, Smith County joins with four completely different counties for “water rights.” Still, Smith County eventually decides that the new confederation established to handle water rights abuses its delegated authority. So it can “opt out” and restore local control.
These confederacies act in a way similar to the old states did, but now each county is deciding with which other counties to interact and on what issues. It might work with one for education and another for criminal justice. And further, each county can back out of an agreement it has made as it remains sovereign, to join another confederacy or go it alone.
This will create competitive markets for how these confederacies operate and what they offer without destroying local control. The only restrictions are that no county can have more influence on decision-making than any other; all counties, in all things, whether in a confederacy or not, are of equal value and influence, regardless of population, wealth, or size. And a limit on the number of counties within any given association would be set to around 20.
Central Powers?
Like the Confederacy, at the federal level we do away with political parties, which are now illegal. The only way the central government could ever expand its limited powers (perhaps temporarily strengthened to repel an invasion) is if each and every one of the multiple thousands of counties all voted for it (they all have one vote), and even then, its powers are only temporarily delegated and can be taken back by any county or all of them whenever they desire. The federal government cannot ever expand its powers sua sponte by simply declaring it; there is no electoral body, no elections, no political strife, no politicians, nothing to set the counties against each other or force them to vie for power and control; all the power is with the counties.
The leader of the country could be appointed or elected to a position, but preferably it would then be passed down hereditarily to prevent anyone from trying to seize power. A king and a royal family would be at the helm of the central government, but their purpose would be more about what they prevent than what they do. Establishing a king prevents those who desire to be at the pinnacle of power (politicians and their corporate backers) from attaining it. It removes politics, elections, strife, centralized power, and more from being realized. The king defends all the local autonomous realms against more substantial political blocs that would seek to subjugate them based on superior wealth, power, or numbers of soldiers. His authority prevents others from taking you over, allowing self-government to be maintained.
The king’s position is hereditary, one born to the position, not one who would seek it. He receives no extra power or money for any action he takes, and could give no favors to any section of the country. He reigns only within his own county. His only real job at the national level would be to ensure one realm does not invade another and to protect against/help fight off invasion. But even here, he would not be in command of all the armies across the country but only that of his own little realm. The king would have his autonomous realm from which he derived his funds and soldiers and he would call upon the others to help.
The royal family’s county would feature public displays of Christ and Christianity and be a symbolic Christian head of the entire country, but other realms do not have to be “Christian;” they can be Buddhist, Hindu, secular etc. The royal family would have a reserved area to reside in with land and it would also have Christian displays and ceremonies. It is also possible that the royal family (rather than the realm in which it resides being the permanent seat of government) could move from realm to realm. Other districts might “host” the royal family and king for a set time if they desired. But he holds no authority within this new realm he is visiting. It would be more of a prestigious, symbolic visit.
The county of the king is only a small landmass, perhaps equal to five or ten average-sized counties. His immediate jurisdiction applies only to this landmass, as the counties are autonomous of his rule. His district is also self-regulated. The king’s only policy interaction with foreign nations would be to ensure free trade (though individual realms could impose tariffs within their spheres) and be a symbol of peace and goodwill to other countries. No taxation or regulations across the nation would ever be imposed or could be; the king’s realm must be self-sufficient from taxation within that realm. He has no authority to impose any laws or taxes or commands outside of his own district. His only purposes are to self-regulate his district, act as a symbolic diplomatic agent to foreign countries, seek peace, and assist in handling disputes between countries and in specific military operations.
The Military
The king’s realm and every autonomous area would have a force (if they chose), and the leaders of each realm would take an oath upon coming to their position never to invade another territory and to help defend other realms from invasion—if doing that was not contrary to their own local laws and ideals. So if one area invaded another, it would be the oath-bound duty of thousands of realms to send help and fight off the invader.
Some realms within the country might have conscription, but nationally there would be none. It would be the king’s duty to muster men in his county and lead them into war. He could call on the counties (as do the presidents, governors etc. of the other realms) for help. But it is up to each autonomous area to decide how or whether to respond. If they do not deem the invasion a threat or think the war unjust, they are under no obligation to aid. It may be that if we come under invasion, 50% of the realms conscript and send all the aid they can, 25% ignore the call for aid, and 25% send only willing volunteers and donations.
Further, the hope is that, due to the removal of centralized politics, each section would have no political reason to hate another and would also see strength in unity. By fighting for another realm’s freedom, they are really protecting themselves because they are defending their own right to be self-governed; if they were invaded, they would also want help. Hopefully, the blessing of attaining actual self-governance would be a motivator to comply. I imagine extensive volunteers coming forth, a few small but well-trained armies able to assist. Even if only 10% of realms responded, any attempted invader would be drastically outnumbered since the districts have been reduced in individual size and might. Expansion would not be an enticing option.
So each realm would have agreed not to invade or impose on another, with a chance of losing their self-governance for a repeat offense. Another option for egregious violations would be for the people within the offending district to be deported out of the county, and a new population with new policies to then move in. The harmed area would receive just compensation for its losses from the former district before the expulsion took place. This would provide yet another deterrent to invasion, as the people within the district would rebel against wayward local authorities who desired to invade another. The people should always be the first deterrent to the overreach of their own local authorities.
We would evacuate and possibly sell most or all of our military bases, foreign territory, etc., and bring our military personnel back home where the military would primarily be based on the nation’s borders, and at a few selected bases operating as their own counties. We would avoid war at all costs and seek friendship with other nations. We would not go to war unless invaded on our own territory, neither can we expand by military conquest. We would not subjugate any nation we did go to war with, even after victory. At most, we would seek compensation for losses and put another foreign nation/ally in charge or, more desirable, the nation itself back in command. While we would desire to be friendly with all nations, we would avoid alliances forcing us into another war. At all costs, we would attempt to live peacefully.
Difficulties
If we now have thousands of autonomous counties, how do we deal with crimes committed by outsiders in those realms? The laws of each district determine how crimes are judged. When you move to an area or operate in it, you are under their laws and jurisdiction; if you commit a crime within it, they judge you under their law. And their law can punish outsiders more harshly than their own people!
Another issue with the move to purely local economies and politics is that corporations would likely be forced to sell specific establishments to local owners. Or the corporation itself might decentralize and sell to local employees while remaining the same in others. However, with more variation and competing realms, they will also be given improved opportunities. More libertarian tax-free, low-regulation zones that welcome them would provide better chances to make profits.
Perhaps the most challenging aspect of local rule would be handling disputes between bordering districts. But remember, tribal communities have achieved this for thousands of years (often peacefully) throughout history, so it can be done. Plus, my system has added incentives to maintain peace.
Yet, think of a challenging circumstance where two realms are located adjacent to each other, and one district is allowing pollutants from their factories to go downstream to the other area that is “green” and has outlawed these pollutants within their realm. This, they say, is a form of invasion, as others outside are intruding on them to their detriment. The hope is that diplomatic agreement can be reached between the two conflicting realms, but if they cannot agree on their own, they need some option besides war to resolve a conflict; no district is allowed to start a war with another, or they face all other realms.
So, if two realms cannot come to terms, they can appeal to a court made up of judges from willing realms across the land. The judges are performing a service and are not paid, and each district determines how theirs is chosen, appointed, elected, or otherwise. They do not “meet” and hear cases in a single location like the U.S. Supreme Court but travel to the areas of dispute, or receive the information in their home realms and decide. The case is brought before the court to see if a genuine violation meriting recompense has occurred. First, the offended territory must establish that it is being intruded into on its own land and its laws violated. Then, it must show that there is evident harm being done within its territory and against its laws. Judges can investigate the accused realm (if that realm allows them in) to assess the situation. But each side will be able to make its own case. After the judges have viewed all the evidence, the accused realm is found guilty only if 80% or more of the judges agree. After a guilty verdict, the judges decide what is just compensation.
As in the Middle Ages, infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and so on would be under local control. The towns could tax to maintain them or charge travelers through tolls, or private companies could do so in exchange for toll-collecting rights, offering their expertise to realms across the land. Districts could cooperate and fund long highways together, and traveling merchants or guild/corporation members would pass along them, offering to trade for food and other goods or to provide expert services such as education and more to the different realms.
Moving from a subsidized, centralized industrial food system to a much more locally self-sufficient economy would present challenges for some. But instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, various realms could try new solutions, adopt successful ones, and discard the rest. Recently, urban farming has exploded in popularity, demonstrating its efficiency and potential to alleviate the challenges posed by our reliance on long-distance food supply chains. While merchants and trade can still provide for cities as they have in the past, urban farming—where land can be allocated just outside the city, reducing transportation costs—has proven to be effective.
According to renowned organic farmer Joel Salatin, a city in China was granted permission to build a new urban area as long as it could feed itself—and it succeeded! Solutions such as rooftop gardens, greenhouses, abandoned buildings repurposed for agriculture, and shared grazing areas have all contributed to this self-sufficiency. So even cities can feed themselves if it becomes a necessity. They do not currently, as it is not in their economic interest to do so under our current system.
However, in my proposed system, many people would leave the cities and find country life more affordable and profitable. Large cities have many disadvantages for those living in them and are only maintained through taxes, large-scale transport, and other factors. While they may not face a decline as significant as the fall of Rome, I predict some form of migration from cities to towns and rural areas. This would support and encourage self-sufficiency while avoiding the subsidization of centralization and urban economic preferences.
Foreign Invasion
America is geographically isolated, protected by two oceans, and is unlikely to experience an invasion. Additionally, the desire for free trade and avoiding involvement in wars with other nations would save money and hopefully prevent our creating enemies, as with our current interventionist military practices we all too often do. We would not be as reliant on the world economy, and therefore would have no reason (or legal ability) to interfere in other countries’ affairs. Instead, we would aim to be as self-sufficient as possible while still allowing for free trade, a good friend to any nation of the world.
However, the threat of invasion remains something that must be allowed for, however unlikely it may seem. Could a localized economy and military protect itself from invasion? Not as well as our current system, but fear is a prime motivator for politicians and the modern state, stirred up to scare their population into supporting more government authority, increased taxation, and building up a military. In other words, the threat of an invasion of American soil is exaggerated both today and in this hypothetical proposal.
America’s military and economy are far beyond what is needed to protect itself. Looking at the economy, we are by far the world leader. If we were to compare the economies of different states, we would find that Georgia is akin to Belgium, Illinois to Turkey, Florida to Spain and Switzerland, New York to Canada, Ohio to Austria, Oklahoma to Hungary, Wisconsin to Malaysia, Indiana to Norway, and Texas to Italy. The combined economic strength would provide more than enough resources to defend the country. Additionally, other nations would likely avoid conflict with us as we would withdraw worldwide, reducing the chances of conflicts of interest. The benefits of remaining allied and engaging in free trade are immense.
Our military is just as enormous; for example, as of now and including our nine helicopter carriers, America has 20 aircraft carriers, while the next most is China with three. We have nearly half of the world’s carriers.
Higher education would likely continue as it did in the Middle Ages (or today’s private and charter schools and universities), owned and funded by churches, philanthropists, corporations, alumni, and others. There is no doubt that “schooling” would be less vital and higher education would be for the intelligent, hardworking students who desired it only. Public schools were created to form the worldview of the individual so as to control their future votes, and to train for hourly wage labor in factories. With this new economy they would be almost obsolete, at least nationally. Local communities could have obligatory education within their district funded by their taxpayers if they chose to do so. As in all of my proposals, local liberty would increase and central control would fade away, as thankfully no longer required.
Also, see Jeb Smith’s discussion on this topic.
