I understand them very well. I understand the state of nature, the social contract, and the natural rights one surrenders to live in society, which is the opposite of the state of nature. Revolution overthrows the social contract and creates a new one in its place. Sometimes this happens peacefully. Usually not. And the existing order has no obligation to simply roll over.
I'm more Hobbesian than Rousseauian.
While some natural rights are slightly modified when living in a society, there are others that remain untouched. The right to withdraw consent to be governed by or associated with people who seek dominance over your life is one such natural law that is neither surrendered nor modified.
Revolution or secession, We could probably get into a fairly long debate over the intricacies and nuanced differences, but in the end the words we choose to define our cause are done so carefully and with purpose. Revolution has an aura of violence about it and Secession has an aura of civility (or at least the hope of civility). The results are often times the same but the justifications are entirely different.
As for the threat of violence the existing “order” hangs over our heads... heh... If thats the cost of freedom, then so be it.