I have, on my desk, a copy of the oath of one George Washington.
I George Washington, Commander in Chief of the Armies of the United States of America do acknowledge the United States of America to be Free, Independent, and Sovereign States, and declare that the people thereof owe no allegiance or obediance to George the Third, King of Great Britain; and i renounce, refute and abjure any allegiance or obedience to him; and I do Swear that I will to the utmost of my power, support, maintain and defend to said United States, against the said King George the Third, his heirs and successors and his or their abettors, assistants and adherents, and will serve the said United States in the office of Commander in Chief ... which I now hold, with fidelity, according to the best of my skill and understanding. G. Washington”
The difference: The colonies did not pretend to legal secession, rather they revolted, which only became legal because they won. If they had lost, G. Washington and the others would probably have been hung. That requires real bravery, real commitment, and is only attempted for the most serious of causes, which you can find explained in the Declaration of Independence.
By contrast, secession at pleasure, as pretended by the slave power which ruled the southern states, followed by attempting a war against the legitimate US government for spurious causes deserves nothing but my contempt, no matter the courage of their devoted but deluded soldiers.
“The difference: The colonies did not pretend to legal secession, rather they revolted, which only became legal because they won. If they had lost, G. Washington and the others would probably have been hung. “
And those of us with patriot ancestors would be listening to independence haters denouncing Washington and company as evil slave owning traitors. The same drill that neoyankees now do, but just with a new target.
If George Washington had been born in the 1820’s, do you think he would have been a Confederate?