- This topic has 5 voices and 3 replies.
-
Posts
-
A question if i might, if the issue of separation of the States, or Dis Union if You will, was decided in a neutral court, lets say Australia for the sake of argument, what would have been the outcome?
Good luck finding a neutral court. If I accept your premise I would argue that Union would have trumped secession in a neutral court.
The South would lose. Southerners had the biggest hand in creating the Constitution and therefore, would be laughed out of court.
This is why war happened. The premise would be the same as the American colonists taking their case to this "neutral" court against the King. They are subjects of Britain, bound by the Kings laws. So, if a disagreement cannot be settled in this manner the result is war.The South could get the Union to acquiesce, so war it was.Personally, I think the South had legitimate gripes, but their legal ground was shaky at best.
Based on the political philosophy on which the United States was found–that the just powers of gov't come from the consent of the governed–I think the South would have/should have won.However, the South did not elect to take their case to court. Instead they took it to the battle field (firing on Ft. Sumter was a huge error) and consequently must accept the decision they received: the Union is indissoluble.
