>found country on secession from Britain
>forbid states to secede
DEVILISH
E
V
I
L
I
S
H
ethically since they went into the union voluntarily they probably should've succeeded voluntarily
practically America didn't want to Balkanize into a bunch of random states that would be eventually taken over by the Brits or other Euro powers
subtextually states were succeeding to keep their slaves anyway so the "muh freedoms" argument didn't have much weight at that point
It was a representative union. If they wanted to secede they should have done so with majority approval. The south didn't do this and then, acting like the petulant child it always has, they seceded illegally on the basis that they were allowed to own human beings.
>>1819528
Pfffft
>start a revolution
>ask for help from france
>receive it
>france starts a revolution literally 17 minutes later
>ask for help from the usa
>they refuse
>>1819799
Who do you think Americans should have helped? The France that helped them (Ancien RĂ©gime) or the France that started a revolution?
>>1819766
difference is that in the revolution there were foreign powers aiding us
in the civil war those powers looked at the rednecks trying to keep their slave economies and were like "muh freedoms amirite?"
>>1819925
Doesn't matter why they wanted to secede. Where did the federal government have the right to compel them to stay? They voluntarily joined, they can voluntarily leave.
>>1820008
not everyone in the south wanted to secede. It was largely the upper class slave holders who wanted to maintain the status quo (free labor is p. great for profits after all, especially if you can just kill bad workers).
there was areas such as West Virginia and East Tennessee that seceded themselves cause they thought the Confederacy was horseshit. Even Lee didn't like secession but fought for the Rebels cause he was a Virginian.