A revolution is only such when an insurrection succeeds.
Possession of the colonies was just a claim by Brits determined by the Right of Conquest. The violations of the “Rights of Englishmen” was one of the main causes of our revolt.
This is a completely different from an insurrection which revolts against a legitimate government proceeding from the consent of the governed.
The War came about entirely because of Southern fears about slavery. Even as you showed there was no threat except becoming less powerful as new states were added.
These states had formed a contractual relationship which cannot be dissolved on a whim, particularly since the rights of the South were never threatened.
This contract could not be unilaterally abrogated and treated like a Moslem marriage.
“This is a completely different from an insurrection which revolts against a legitimate government proceeding from the consent of the governed.”
Actually, the whole point of the rebellion was that those in the South no longer gave consent to be governed!
“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
I have a measure of sympathy for the idea that one doesn’t split off just because one has lost an election. But if the big cities on the coast reach a point where all of the US is expected to live IAW “San Francisco values” - and we are not far from that now! - then I can fully understand saying, “This government no longer represents me and will never represent me - so we are leaving!”
Which is EXACTLY what the American Revolution was about! And if Texas ever decides to leave the Union, I’ll hope Arizona joins them.
In 2018, in the vote for Senate, California gave 10 million votes split between 2 Democrats. No Republican was in the running. In the House, 10 of 53 seat went to Republicans. Democrats won a 3.5 million margin in California House races (65% - 33% split). Hard not to conclude that without California, the rest of the US would be in good shape!
Possession of legal and moral authority to stop someone from leaving your control was just a claim by Lincoln that was determined by the Right of Conquest.
But let us make no mistake about it. It was a conquest not a moral right or an adherence to existing law.
This is a completely different from an insurrection which revolts against a legitimate government proceeding from the consent of the governed.
Where did this "Consent of the Governed" idea come from? Why does it hold any moral or legal power?