NS you can call them rebels or secessionists. Both are true and both are accurate. They seceeded from the British Empire and knew they were doing so.
As far as the treatment of the South from the North, I don’t agree with you. Lincoln, and Johnson and Grant understood that without a quick healing, there would have been a guerilla war in the South for years.
And quite frankly, the destruction that the North visited upon civilian centers and private property in the South that was not miitarily engaged in the Rebellion was criminal. So the South suffered quite enough to be “punished”. The South did not rise again for almost one hundred years.
The Court and its decisions have no force except in the willingness of men to respects its decisions. You are correct on that point.
But failing that, they can enforce nothing, nor can they prevents the bonds that connect people from being severed.
The people in Washington DC who form our government do not have unlimited license to rule us just by virtue of being elected or appointed legally.
In history there is many a time when the existing authority is challenged over the right to govern.
The outcome is predicated on the level of the determination of either side to prevail in the struggle, and the amount of resources committed to victory.
The victory of the colonists was never a foregone conclusion. That makes their struggle and victory all the more remarkable. In my opinion, it was providential.
Not really, no. Secession is defined as "to withdraw formally from membership in an organization, association, or alliance." The implication is that the act is legal. Under circumstances where the action is illegal, then it is most properly defined as rebellion or revolution.
As far as the treatment of the South from the North, I don’t agree with you. Lincoln, and Johnson and Grant understood that without a quick healing, there would have been a guerilla war in the South for years.
I would ask you to point to a single major rebellion in history where the people suffered less and were incorporated back into the body politic faster than the Southern states were.
And quite frankly, the destruction that the North visited upon civilian centers and private property in the South that was not miitarily engaged in the Rebellion was criminal. So the South suffered quite enough to be “punished”. The South did not rise again for almost one hundred years.
About the same time that the South was engaged in her rebellion, a rebellion in China was finishing that had cost over 50 million lives and which had devestated whole sections of the country. Please do not tell us how the poor South suffered for her actions.
The people in Washington DC who form our government do not have unlimited license to rule us just by virtue of being elected or appointed legally.
Nor do the states.
In history there is many a time when the existing authority is challenged over the right to govern.
But seldom for less reason than the Southern U.S.