Customer Reviews

Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century

5 star:		(55)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

Tom Woods' latest book is another example of the author doing what he does best--dissecting political and economic failure by striking at the root of the problem and offering common sense and constitution-based solutions, something he always does in an easy to comprehend, everyman style. Ironically, the solutions Woods offers are often considered unconventional or controversial, but only by the same professional talking heads who got us into virtually every mess the author addresses.

As with his bestseller "Meltdown," in which Woods explained how the Federal Reserve and government intervention were primary culprits in the ongoing recession, "Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century," is a how-to for Americans fed up with an out-of-control Washington, DC. Question: How can we expect a federal government no longer restrained by the Constitution to be contained by that document any time in the future? Answer: by containing it ourselves.

Woods argues that Americans concerned about federal overreach--on everything from the imposition of national healthcare to medicinal marijuana laws--should revisit the "principles of '98," as in 1798, when James Madison and Thomas Jefferson famously insisted that the federal government, as Woods puts, "cannot be permitted to hold a monopoly on constitutional interpretation" or the "exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers," or it would continue to grow, "regardless of elections, the separation of powers and other much-touted limits on government power."

Per the 10th amendment and Madison and Jefferson's example, Woods argues that states should render void--or nullify--oppressive federal mandates, as not only a necessary measure, but perhaps the only possible way Americans might ever stuff the beast in Washington back into its constitutional box. Woods points out that nullification is not only an old, all-American concept whose time has come, but is far more practical method of substantively addressing today's problems than the false solutions offered by the Left/Right, two-party paradigm, a truly archaic political model which has kept us distracted from the real dilemma of unchecked government power--something our rulers laughably keep insisting they will keep in check so long as their own party holds all the power in government.

FOX News host Judge Andrew Napolitano is correct when he says "In clear and well-documented arguments, Tom Woods gives hope to those who wish to tame the federal monster as the Framers intended--by using the utterly lawful and historically accepted principle of Nullification." Indeed. And with his latest offering, Tom Woods has given Americans who genuinely want to "take their country back" the blueprint to do just that.

Full disclosure: I am a personal friend of Tom Woods. Even so, I like some of his books more than others, but _Nullification_ is definitely one of his gems. Until I read this book, I had no idea that the concept of nullification was NOT invented in, say, 1858 by the legislatures of southern states.

On the contrary, Woods shows that this was an idea championed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and flowed seamlessly from the "compact theory of the Union." Nullification was not an ad hoc principle dreamed up in a particular battle over states' rights, but instead was an integral part of Jefferson's philosophy of a federation in which the central government only received enumerated (and strictly limited) powers from the states who constituted the Union.

This book is a great read for anyone who loves colonial and early US history. Woods sketches a vision of early America that we didn't learn in grade school. For example, the handbill announcing the "Anti-Slave-Catchers' Mass Convention" (p. 82) is amazing--outraged citizens in Wisconsin didn't want to hand over an escaped slave as the feds dictated (under the Fugitive Slave Act). This episode is but one example that Woods provides, to prove that very often "states' rights" were used to *protect* liberty. Is that really so hard to understand--that sometimes the *federal* government is the bad guy?

A surprise in this book is Chapter 4, "What Is (or Are) the United States, Anyway?" Here Woods makes a compelling argument for the compact theory of the Union, which is the view that the federal government was created by the individual States when they ratified the Constitution. (A nationalist view holds that "the people of the United States" collectively formed the central government, and that therefore the individual state governments are subordinate to it.)

Much of Woods' evidence I had read before, but a new one was his focus on the Declaration of Independence itself, which says:

"...That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do" (qtd p. 97).

Woods points out that if the individual States, upon their declaration of independence, retained the rights to *start wars and contract alliances*, then surely they were sovereign political entities, in the way that France and Great Britain were separate States. It is then an easy matter to show that at no point, whether with the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution (which after all was ratified NOT by the American public but by the individual states), did these initially sovereign states cede all of their powers to the U.S. government.

All in all, an excellent book that provides a new look at American history, but also draws lessons that are very relevant in today's political battles.

There's a lot of talk about "revolution" these days--the Ron Paul version being the loudest and most sweeping--but as far as I know, none of the revolutions being talked about have teeth. Paul's is focused on first auditing the Federal Reserve, then getting rid of it altogether, but that takes acts of Congress, which, barring any sea change in the near future, isn't going to be committing any such act as good for the country as that.

Enter Thomas E. Woods, who wrote the succinct, powerful Meltdown about the economic crisis. Woods looks back to the age of unprecedented American prosperity (the early nineteenth century) for an idea that will move the country forward in all respects: nullification. The idea is pretty simple: states have the right to simply reject anything the federal government puts out that expressly contradicts the Constitution. This revolution is much more easily obtained as it requires the participation of a state, not the entire country.

As the documents in Part II of the book reveal, Woods bases his concept of writings all published before the Civil War. To many, that might sound quaint, but to others, that age represented the peak of liberty on Earth (at least certain demographics). Only if we look to the original intent of the United States can we really understand the potential of this country. As Woods writes, was the United States supposed to be just another run-of-the-mill centralized power or was the United States created as a conglomerate of independent political societies?

The answer, of course, is the latter. But that has been confused as the power-hungry D.C. types look to consolidate control over the entire population. They want socialism. But they don't want socialism just for themselves (which would be fine), they want it for you too, and everyone else, which is not fine. Should not citizens in this country be able to "opt out" of a corrupt, self-destructive federalism?

Woods' answer is yes. He shows that nullification has a rich history and is, in fact, at the core of the original intent of the country.

There have been so many conservative and libertarian books complaining about how Congress has exceeded its constitutional powers and the federal government has grown far beyond what the Founding Fathers ever intended.

This one is different: It actually shows how we could do something about it.

First, Woods shows why the usual methods don't work. Electing new Senators and Representatives doesn't work because no matter what politicians promise, they always end up caving to special interests. Trying to get the Supreme Court to strike down unconstitutional laws doesn't work, either, because the judicial branch is part of the very federal government we want to restrain, and it's shown again and again that it won't respect the Constitution's (supposed) limits on federal power.

Next, Woods explains the alternative: nullification, whereby individual states can declare unconstitutional laws null and void and prevent their enforcement against the state's citizens.

Although that idea may be new to many readers (most civics teachers, historians, and law professors completely ignore it), Woods shows that it is not new at all. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and many others in the founding era thought nullification was essential to stop the federal government from growing out of control. And Woods shows how nullification has been used at various times in American history to attack oppressive federal laws, including the Alien and Sedition Acts and the Fugitive Slave Act.

Most importantly, Woods shows how nullification can work again today. Some states are already starting to revive it -- for example, California has said no to the federal government (even the Supreme Court!) on the issue of medical marijuana, and many states have said no to the federal REAL ID Act.

The numerous historical documents included with the book prove the importance of nullification in American history and provide additional ammunition you can use to make the case to others.

This isn't a dry work of history or legal theory, though. It's a manual for how we could shrink the federal government to something much closer to what the people who ratified the Constitution intended. That means Tea Partiers, libertarians, and anyone else who is serious about seeking real change -- instead of just playing the same old rigged political game -- should read this book.

Most reviews here discuss the reviewer's belief in the principles of nullification rather than the book, so I will try to stick to the book, the author and the greatest fault in this otherwise extraordinary book, the incomplete contrary arguments.

The author, Thomas Woods, is a respected historian who is also an excellent writer of several other best-selling books including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and other well-known books on American History. He is quite outspoken but does detailed research to support his opinions. You can count on any of his books being accurate, informative and well-reasoned.

This book concerns the idea of nullification of laws that are held to be unconstitutional. The heart of this debate is the age old question of "Who watches the Watchers"? (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?) Or as Lenin put it more elementally "Kto kvo?" - Who does what to whom? How do individuals granted rights by our Creator maintain these rights in Community or Government? Much of this book reviews the Americanist resolution of this question - a limited Government given limited and specified powers.

Woods is at his best tracing and explaining and supporting this concept. He uses so many impeccable sources that it would be hard to support the "living Constitution" school of thought where the Constitution means whatever those in power say it means. I highly recommend reading this short book for a discussion of these ideas.

The book itself is only 145 pages followed by 120 pages of documents to which the book refers. You can read the book in a few hours and then read the documents at leisure. Including many of the entire documents that are being discussed is a great idea and I wish more books would do this. You can see for yourself that Woods is not just picking a quote here or there to justify his views.

Woods argues that the States themselves are one of the major check and balances built into our system in addition to the 3 branches themselves. Woods traces the idea of nullification from the sovereign 13 states to the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution and it's ratifying to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. These acts made criticism of the President a crime. Multiple people were fined and imprisoned. The States of Kentucky and Virginia both objected and passed state laws nullifying these Acts because they were unconstitutional. The fact that James Madison, Father of the Constitution, and Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, wrote these resolutions gives them solid standing.

Woods also does a good job of showing how over the years multiple states have advocated this up to and including California and other states who legalize medical marijuana regardless of what the Federal Government thinks. So this nullification debate is as current as the morning paper, in spite of what a few reviewers here who obviously didn't even read the book claim.

One criticism is that Woods is somewhat incomplete in the occasional contrary information from equally impeccable sources. For example, Patrick Henry made a rousing speech about being an American and not just a Virginian. Benjamin Franklin talked of Americans being a new race of people. The nationalist viewpoint that the states are subordinate units has more support than Woods admits.

The last chapter is about how to apply the idea of nullification to current tyrannical extensions of government power. Where in the Constitution does it say I must buy a "government approved" product (health insurance) or face criminal prosecution? When the government infringes on my right of self-defense in spite of the explicit wording of the Constitution itself in the second amendment that my rights "shall not be infringed", what can I do by myself? Woods says we can organize at the state level and nullify these laws. He spends a few pages explaining how this can be done and how to deal with the federal government that will certainly resist this.

Whether this is a practical solution to government tyranny or not is something you will have to decide for yourself, but this is an important and entertaining book and ought to be read by everyone on both sides of the political spectrum. Four stars.

Nullification, by Tom Woods, is not just a great read. It's not just a handbook for the Tea Party, or for the opposition groups when the next President is in office. It's a strategy manual for the ages. What we're talking about here is a monumental shift of power, from Washington DC and its corporate backers, to where it belongs - in the hands of the people assembled in their respective states. Woods brilliantly lays out the blueprint - it's just up to We the People to take charge and do something about it.

That's how Jefferson, Madison and most other prominent founders wanted it to be....and our time to take that advice and run with it is now.

Nullification provides good history as to how checks and balances are supposed limit power in America. Many Americans are now learning that Congress can merely reinforce Presidents who disregard constitutional limits on their authority. We should rely on the Supreme Court either, given recent appointments. Woods shows that we did not have to wait until now to learn these lessons. The architects of the American Republic understood that states should also serve to check Federal power. The idea that nullification is not only useful, but indispensible is plausible. Woods has done a great service by informing the `right side' of current debates over the future balance of power between citizen and state in America. I just wish we had done more sooner.

Is a federal government created by the states the only legitimate judge of it's own power? Is it a conflict of interest for the federal judiciary (i.e. the Supreme Court) to rule on the extent of the federal government's power when it conflicts with that of the states that made it? Is "States Rights" just an obscure rallying cry for wannabe rebels or was it an integral part of our founding, and a key component of the checks and balances designed to keep our federal government from becoming just another tyranny?
This is a great book about a legal concept most people are not even aware is an option for opposing unconstitutional federal laws, much less an option favored by both Madison and Jefferson. Unfortunately, the few people that have heard of nullification only associate it with the South's lead-up to secession. However, Thomas Woods does a great job of writing a very well-documented thesis that shows how nullification was used by both Northern and Southern states to hold the power-hungry federal government in check. He uses extensive historical quotes from Jefferson, Madison, and others to show both the original intent and later application of nullification to prevent onerous laws from being enforced against a state's citizens.
While the language of the quotes from the 1700's and 1800's might be difficult for some modern readers, it is well worth the effort to read and understand our nation's history in order to change the course we're on. The second half of the book is historical documents referenced in the first half, such as the Constitution, the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and James Madison's Report of 1800, among others. Following that are extensive endnotes for those wanting more information or wanting to verify the accuracy of Woods' research. Point is, read it, learn to question everything about your government and hold them accountable, because they surely won't walk the line on their own.

"No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the constitution, can be valid." - Alexander Hamilton.

Tom Woods continues his streak of excellent writing in Nullification. Like almost all of the author's books, Nullification presents a much misunderstand argument at the heart of a very controversial issue. True to his usual form, Tom Woods presents the truth in a clear, understandable and easy to read way that will have the reader unable to put the book down once they pick it up.

Nullification makes its case against the prevailing wisdom and "education" of today which believes nullification was invented by Southern Confederates and was an issue solved by the Civil War. Woods goes through great pains to present the true history of the issue, from the writing of the constitution to examples in modern times. A "must read" for anyone interested in history, politics and government. I plan to re-read this book several times. It is, by far, the most well written and interesting new book I have read this year.

This is a well documented book showing states resisting the continual encroachment of Federal bureaucracy on our United States Constitution. Without the means to insure a limited Federal government the power expands on its own assumed authority until we have only tyranny and oppression. This could be one of the last hopes U.S. citizens have of a government "Of the people and for the people".