Honor, ethics and morality are goofy? In your world maybe but not in mine. Words have meaning and to warp them to fit a desire is contemptible.
I’m amused by people who cannot (or will not) see the distinction between secession, which is the orderly process of ending a treaty, confederacy, or union, and rebellion.
Rebellion, as evidenced by the Colonialists, was standing up to the Crown and defiantly renouncing their allegiance. They did so in the full knowledge that they would encounter violent reprisal and, should they fail, they would all hang.
There was no sugar-coating or pretense to it.
In the case of the Slavers Rebellion, they were the original “word-game” artists, making up the artifice of a unilateral secession in order to make themselves feel better about their insurrection.
If you’re comfortable about words being malleable and meaning whatever, who am I to stop you?
Rots a ruck
Wonderful.
In the meantime, the principles laid down in the D of I applies to the South and the Civil War because both were about DISSOLVING the political bands which had connected them.
Bye and rots a ruck rockrr.
Were the acts of the Southern states in leaving the Union in 1860-61 exactly analogous to the American colonies declaring their independence from the British Crown? The states voluntarily joined and were accepted into the Union. While the colonial governments declared their independence, they did not consent to subjection to the Crown. Britain established the colonies and allowed provincial assemblies to govern most internal matters, subject to royal governors. A better analogy to the colonial declarations of independence is Rhodesia making a unilateral declaration of independence from the Crown in 1965. The Southern states secession is analogous to Ireland declaring its independence, as that country was incorporated into the United Kingdom in 1801. The difference between the Southern and Irish cases is that the Irish Parliament had been dissolved upon joining the UK, while the Southern state governments remained intact. The Irish had to set up a parallel government, complete with military and courts, from scratch during the period of their war for independence. The Southern states had governmental functions in place before and after secession.
Were the acts of the Southern states in leaving the Union in 1860-61 exactly analogous to the American colonies declaring their independence from the British Crown? The states voluntarily joined and were accepted into the Union. While the colonial governments declared their independence, they did not consent to subjection to the Crown. Britain established the colonies and allowed provincial assemblies to govern most internal matters, subject to royal governors. A better analogy to the colonial declarations of independence is Rhodesia making a unilateral declaration of independence from the Crown in 1965. The Southern states secession is analogous to Ireland declaring its independence, as that country was incorporated into the United Kingdom in 1801. The difference between the Southern and Irish cases is that the Irish Parliament had been dissolved upon joining the UK, while the Southern state governments remained intact. The Irish had to set up a parallel government, complete with military and courts, from scratch during the period of their war for independence. The Southern states had governmental functions in place before and after secession.