Simple logic eludes you. No problem . . . you could frame the issue as statist versus not-so-statist, but to paint one side as “libertarian” simply is retarded.
What would be the not-so-statist position? Lincoln invaded the South and killed three quarters of a million people in order to prevent the the Southerners from governing themselves. All in the name of some abstract notion of "union" that none of the founders would have recognized or supported. Even Hamilton denied the possibility of any state being forcibly coerced by the central government.