|
Is it treason to secede from this union?
No, I don't believe it is. If any state chooses to, through democratic and fair means to separate from the union, then it is incumbent upon a just union to allow that separation, so long as it is done in a measured and moderate manner to ensure that rights of citizens are not disrespected, and that stability and peace is maintained.
The Confederates did not withdraw in such a manner. They did not exhaust all legal means of peacable separation. For example, Texas had it in black and white that if she just said the word, she could regain her independence from the Union. Instead they chose violence and illegal means to further their objective. Texas, by joining the conspiracy lost her special circumstance.
Why did so many dirt-poor farmers who couldn't dream of owning a slave fight so hard for their states. Obviously there are many reasons. One is pure nationalism (Statism?), and as Shani points out, sense of honor compelled many to fight for their leaders, right or wrong. Many did what men of honor and good concience have done in war for a long time, and that is they suited up, marched, and then in the face of the enemy, did not run, but did not fire. This was true on both sides, and became an issue amongst men deployed in skirmish or loose formations (close order formations provided tighter control by NCOs and officers and drilled movements versus personal initiative). It is also worthy to note that a great number of the troops on both sides were not volunteers, but were conscripted.
However, the single most important factor in the willingness of men to join up was the romanticism of warfare that was prevalent during the period, a romanticism that would also have dire consequences for the Europeans in WWI. That war pretty well killed the sense of romance in war for most citizens, although, it is worth noting that America has seen an unprecendented surge in romanticism regarding war unprecedented since WWI.
One might feel that Southerners are silly for 'clinging' to their glory days when they raised their banner, damned the guns, and died for their homes like never before or since. But does one condecend American blacks for reviving African heritages, particularly tribal heritages from before the white man came...do you tell a Black? Do we disparage Original Americans for maintaining the tribal ties and communities...do you tell a Cherokee to just get over it?
I don't begrudge the South their heritage. They were wrong to start a war over the issue, but then they suffered a lot for that mistake, didn't they? On the other hand, the symbolism is a trickier matter. The Confederates were an illegal organization, and they were a government that condoned slavery to their dying day. Granted, they may well have freed slaves for economic reasons not long after the war had they won, but it doesn't change the facts of what their position was. They started a war which like it or not revolved on the issue of slavery. Superbelt is right, that 'States Rights' is how Confederates put it, but you don't fight a war over 'States Rights' without there being specific rights that are concerned, and in the Civil War's case it was slavery above all, or at least the states' right to have or have not slavery as it so chose.
The Confederacy wholeheartedly supported slavery throughout its existance, and thus like the Nazi's Swastika, Italian Fasces, or Soviet Hammer and Sickle, its symbols have come to be symbols of that position, just as the American flag is a symbol of the ideals we stand for, promote, and exemplify. To display those symbols in honorary positions is to give those positions honor, no matter how one puts it.
__________________
"Don't tell me we're so blind we cannot see that this is my land! I can't pretend that it's nothing to do with me.
And this is your land, you can't close your eyes to this hypocracy.
Yes this is my land, I won't pretend that it's nothing to do with me.
'Cause this is our land, we can't close our eyes to the things we don't wanna see."
- DTH
|