George Mason's America: The State Sovereignty Alternative to Madison's Centralized American Ruling C

In her book, George Mason: Constitutionalist, Helen Hill describes the debate during the 1787 convention in terms of sectionalism, meaning that the northern states did not want to form a centralized union with the southern slaveocracy.

Hill writes,

"The sense of sectionalism became so strong that some of the members saw no solution but to organize two confederacies...on July 13 Morris stated, "Instead of attempting to blend incompatible things, let us at once take friendly leave of each other."...on July 23 Pinckney "reminded the Convention that if the Constitution should fail to insert some security to the Southern States against an emancipation of slaves and taxes on exports, he should be bound by duty to his State to vote against their report,"

Both Morris and Pinckney were correct in their opinion that the two alien cultures should never have been rammed together under a centralized, all-powerful government.

Likewise, today two alien cultures do not co-exist in peace, and do not share common cultural or philosophical principles on the mission of the national government.

We argue that the differences are irreconcilable, and cannot be remedied by amendments or modifications to Madison's document.

We agree with Delegate Morris that the time has come for the conservative states to take friendly leave of the Democrat Marxist states.

We argue that there is only one pathway back to freedom, and taking that path means starting over, with a new constitution, at the point in history when Mason and Jefferson wrote their respective documents, in 1776.