We at the Tenth Amendment Center have promoted the idea that nullification brings people from both sides of the political equation together. And although we have seen mainstream voices from the establishment left and establishment right come together to denounce nullification, the idea continues to catch on amongst the freedom-starved American people. One recent example of nullification catching on comes from the left as author W.W. Houston wrote a recent article for the Economist on May 9 triumphing the idea of nullification and states rights.
Houston began his article with an interesting anecdote about the founding of the Republic of Texas. According to legend, freedom fighters in Texas held up a flag over their cannon that said ‘COME AND TAKE IT’ in defiance of their Mexican oppressors. Houston brought up a recent bill that had passed the Texas House that declared all federal gun control laws to be null and void, comparing it to their revolutionary ancestors. Usually, you would expect a mainstream media outlet at this point to go on a tyrade against this legislation calling it “crazy”, “racist”, “extreme” and every other derogatory term they could come up with. However, this time the Economist has thrown us a curve ball and is actually running the pro-States Rights point of view.
The article goes on to give a solid description of the arguments and counter-arguments for nullification before closing tremendously with an eloquent defense of states rights. “The discretion of states to decide what federal laws they will enforce strikes me as part of a healthy division and balance of government power. Requiring that states devote its citizens’ resources to the enforcement of laws with which the state legislature disagrees seems to me straightforwardly to deny the democratic sovereignty of the state’s people,” Houston said.
Although Houston unfortunately defends the notion of the federal government coming in and imposing their will on the states in certain situations, it is refreshing to hear such a balanced and rational take from a mainstream media blogger. Usually, the drivel we are presented with from the mainstream media is a mixture of deceptions, immature insults, demagoguery and stupidity. This article represents a much-needed departure from the toxic discourse that is so pervasive within the American political sphere.
This article also shows that the mainstream media will be adapting as the public awakens. As we have reported on extensively at TAC, a majority of people now support the idea of nullification. We are the new majority, and we have became the new majority in spite of a whole onslaught of propaganda from the mainstream politicians and their sycophantic media mouthpieces. Hopefully this article is the first in a wave of mainstream outlets finally coming to terms with nullification as a legitimate tool for citizens to reclaim their freedoms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
It is also worth noting that the author of this Economist article is a liberal. As nullification of some of Obama’s onerous agenda such as ObamaCare catches on throughout the country, nullification is maligned more often by critics as a right-wing ideology. But in actuality, nullification is something that appeals to a broad range of people on both sides of the political spectrum. Just look at the ACLU’s support of TAC-backed initiatives nullifying the NDAA and predator drone surveillence across the country. Would the ACLU back extreme right wing measures? I think not.
The mainstream media is maligned very frequently and rightfully so. But when they provide their readers with stimulating, thought-provoking content, they must be given credit and supported as well. In this case, author W.W. Houston and the Economist deserve kudos for giving a rational, sane perspective of nullification and the states rights movement. Making sure that Houston’s article is circulated and well-received will ensure that more of this type of dialogue is circulated by the mainstream media thus further breaking up the influence of the federally-controlled opinion molders.