Jonathan Wilde explains secession versus revolution:
Revolution and Secession are very different things. Revolution is an attempt by a relatively small group of people to gain control over the machinery that rules a relatively larger group of people. Secession is a relatively small group of people breaking off from the larger machinery. The difference is crucial.
So, in theory at least, one could amend one's state constitution, effectively ending that state. But what else? Would the amendment need to recognize some process for creating new entities? The pessimistic side of me says we need to incentivize the political class, perhaps by empowering the cities to hold local conventions, so that the creeps will get on board with us and go for being a big fish in a small pond rather than heading to Washington D.C. and trying to stop the process.
I hold strongly to the idea that should be an iterative process anyway, with several types of government being tried and improved upon. Keep it as small as possible and let folks vote with their feet. It would be lovely to see things get fluid again in America. Imagine actually having to check how many states there are rather than the sad, static nature of the current situation.
Meanwhile, Mencius Moldbug suggests we go the dictator route. It may seem paradoxical but I sympathize to some extent, for most of the tyranny I experience is from people who have authority but no real responsibility and/or people who have opinions but no real knowledge.
In any case, there should come a point soon, where most will think something along the lines of 'anything is better than this.' When that comes, please don't vote for revolution yet again. Secede instead. It's the American thing to do.