Replies

Certainly from the view of the English it was. However, it must be recalled that many of the colonies were private endeavors carried out with the blessings of the King but not necessarily as a government policy. English policy wrt the colonies was very much an ad hoc compliation of ill-thought out acts.

The real point is that the Americans had NO representation in parliament and could not be considered anything but subjects of the King. They were not citizens. Southerners were very much citizens of the US and had, in fact, controlled Congress, the Court and the Executive branches for most of our history up to the War.

These citizens had ratified volutarily the constitution unlike the subjects of the King who agreed to nothing. Thus, rejecting the King as an ruler was nothing like rejecting a lawfully elected president. That president was only elected because the dumbasses of the South split the RAT party into two or three branches each of which ran a candidate. Then, like spoiled brats, they had a hissy fit and started a war that only fools thought they could possibly win.