> This assumes a peaceful transition of power, if violence is used instead all bets are off.
You expect the US government to simply step down?
You expect the US government to simply step down?
Potentially if it could be organized.
> 19 states out of 34 states have already committed to the convention of states.
This is a non-sequitur and has nothing to do with civil disobedience nor the dissolution of the federal govt.
> The US Federal government knows all too well how to deal with violence but they don’t know how to handle peaceful mass non-compliance.
I think a lot of people would dispute this. The standard ways to deal with peaceful mass non-compliance have been known by western governments forever:
1. Split the population into factions with extremes who won't remain peaceful.
if that fails the:
2. Insert agents-provocateur into the peaceful group to spur violence.
Either way the formula is the same - turn an non-violent protest into a violent one and then deal with it as such.
If that happens, there is no reason at all to imagine there will be unified non-violent protest leading to the peaceful stepping down of the US government in favor of something less oppressive.
You only have to look at what has happened in other countries where the populous has been impoverished.