If ol' Abe was trying to say that it was impossible to peacefully break away from a representative government, then I would ask which type of government can one peacefully leave, and exactly how does one do that?
Most folks from Northern states would argue that it requires permission from the Federal government, but we did not have George III's permission in 1776. The only difference between 1776 and 1861 is that the revolting party LOST the war.
Having said that, I also recognize that IF the CSA had won, slavery would still have been abolished --just like in England, France, Mexico, and other countries, but this country would not be the global power that it is today.
I guess it was God's will that we fill our own destiny.
I would surmise that had the CSA successfully and peacefully seceded from the Union that slavery would have died out due to the economic pressures from industrialization. Automation (the cotton gin, tractors and the like) would have made slaves uneconomical to keep in any large numbers.
It is also likely that eventually the CSA or at the very least some of the boarder states would have rejoined the Union. The economic wealth of the North would have made it desirable to rejoin after Lincoln left office and the differences dealing with slavery had rendered themselves moot.
It is also possible that war would have arisen on the issue of Western territories. Namely which nation would have the right to which territories.
However it happened I believe the two would have reunited eventually.
No the major difference is that unlike the confederate supporters around here, the Founding Fathers in 1776 were under no illusions that their actions were legal and didn't moan and cry when the British tried to prevent their rebellion.
Yes an now that Israel is a nation once again I fear it is soon time for judgement from God upon the United States.
Indeed state sovereignty was more emphatic in the nineteeth century, so much so that a victory for the CSA would have legitimized secesssion at will. We would then be a patchwork of sovereign countries, unable at worst and difficult at best to unite as a superpower. Perhaps that was God's intent, to preserve a great power in the world under the United States.
Indeed again it was intended that slavery be abolished in the South by Southerners themselves. But the Civil War or war between the states was not about slavery although many try to make it seem so.
A modern day split we see without violence is Slovakia and the Czech Republic.
A modern day split we see with violence is Croatia and Serbia.
In the Czech-Slovakia case, the Czechs are clearly the strongest economically but were wise not to impose their will on their poorer neighbor. It may also have alot to do with the pacifist government there and the ruins that remained from seven decades of communism. More likely it has to do with the examples set by the Poles whom the Czechs respect and admire.
The Serbian-Croatian case is almost entirely driven by religious differences that is manifest in who gets appointed to what positions of power is entirely dependent on whether a Serb or Croat is in power.
It seems worthy to study how nations of states may split and what factors exist that render the split peaceful or violent.
One can say that Canada and the USA spit because of the USA unwillingness to remove British rule from Canada and absorb it as a territory of the USA. But for all intents and purposes the USA and Canada have come together in a match of culture and history and although they are separately administered they band together in most cases.
A case to watch will be if Quebec is successful in eventually splitting from Canada, whether it will be allowed or not, and if not what will prevent it from doing so.