Lee's Ghost responding: "That really is a bizarre statement.
I mean, we know with absolute certainty that at least 11 states believe exactly that."
Not nearly as "bizarre" as your response, Lee. ;-)
That word "none" above refers to our Founders -- those who wrote and ratified the new US Constitution in 1787 to 1788.
Whenever we talk about Founders' Original Intent, that's who we mean.
Yes, of course, later (some much later) many novel theories got introduced concerning what this or that might have meant, including on the subject of secession.
But the Founders themselves were consistent in saying, or implying, that lawful secession should be by mutual consent or, in effect, some material breech of contract justifying dissolving the Union.
Neither condition existed in 1860, when South Carolina secessionists first began organizing to declare their disunion.
“But the Founders themselves were consistent in saying, or implying, that lawful secession should be by mutual consent or, in effect, some material breech of contract justifying dissolving the Union.”
Comrade Brojoe couldn’t be more wrong. Let’s forget Jefferson and his passion for state rights for a minute and move on to James Madison, you know, “The Father of the Constitution”. Even Federalist Madison opined that there was/is an “extraconstitutional right to revolt against conditions of ‘intolerable oppression’; but if the case cannot be made (that such conditions exist), then he rejected secession—as a violation of the Constitution.”
The only way Comrade Brojoe can square with his beliefs is to have us believe that the oppression being brought upon the south was of the tolerable type. But remember, at the end of the day the north killed hundreds of thousands of Southerners in the successful attempt to deny them THEIR free will. Bottom line in Comrade’s book; slavery bad — denial of (Southern) free will and self governance good.