“I never said the founding fathers had no right to declare independence. I said there is no natural right to independence . . .”
This sounds like double-talk to me. Please explain.
I thought I did in the last post but will try again. But first I have to ask you to clarify something. Are you saying the natural right to revolution is the same as a natural right of independence? i have never seen anyone in political philosophy claim their is a natural right of independence or call the natural right of revolution a natural right of independence.
i would surmise because the very phrase natural right of independence seems to imply that the government you are declaring independence from should just allow you to leave.
The natural right of revolution does not imply this, it actually explicitly doesn’t say that. It is only a right of revolution not a right to win your revolution.