[Non-Sequitur]You should read Madison's writings:
That's for sure, Non-Sequitur. You really should.... Federalist No. 43
Two questions of a very delicate nature present themselves on this occasion: 1. On what principle the Confederation, which stands in the solemn form of a compact among the States, can be superseded without the unanimous consent of the parties to it?
The first question is answered at once by recurring to the absolute necessity of the case; to the great principle of self-preservation; to the transcendent law of nature and of nature's God, which declares that the safety and happiness of society are the objects at which all political institutions aim, and to which all such institutions must be sacrificed. Perhaps, also, an answer may be found without searching beyond the principles of the compact itself. It has been heretofore noted among the defects of the Confederation, that in many of the States it had received no higher sanction than a mere legislative ratification. The principle of reciprocality seems to require that its obligation on the other States should be reduced to the same standard. A compact between independent sovereigns, founded on ordinary acts of legislative authority, can pretend to no higher validity than a league or treaty between the parties. It is an established doctrine on the subject of treaties, that all the articles are mutually conditions of each other; that a breach of any one article is a breach of the whole treaty; and that a breach, committed by either of the parties, absolves the others, and authorizes them, if they please, to pronounce the compact violated and void. Should it unhappily be necessary to appeal to these delicate truths for a justification for dispensing with the consent of particular States to a dissolution of the federal pact, will not the complaining parties find it a difficult task to answer the multiplied and important infractions with which they may be confronted? The time has been when it was incumbent on us all to veil the ideas which this paragraph exhibits. The scene is now changed, and with it the part which the same motives dictate.
You should of highlighted this portion of the quote:
“The first question is answered at once by recurring to the absolute necessity of the case; to the great principle of self-preservation; to the transcendent law of nature and of nature’s God, which declares that the safety and happiness of society are the objects at which all political institutions aim, and to which all such institutions must be sacrificed. “
The Southern Rebellion was about none of these things and thus didn’t meet the requirements of Madison. It was about holding to principles against self-preservation and against the transcendent law of nature and of God.
The southern rebels were then defeated in the war it waged against the United States and yet still went on to terrorize the United States and republicans with groups such as the KKK. Wilson and the progressive movement were the result of the rebel movement of the Southern democrats and continued to fight against natural law and the people’s right to representation equally for all.
It is a joke that this article claims a dislike for Wilson and FDR but not for the Southern rebel democrats that brought us these presidents. Wilson and FDR both helped revive the old Southern rebels terror group, the KKK.
Even in todays age libertarians for the most part are partners with progressives on a majority of issues.
Geez in the orignial article of this thread the author calls for libertarians to celbrate the man who assassinated President Lincoln. This type of rhetoric is straight from the Liberal Marixst / Libertarian playbook. We have seen the same type of rhetoric from both Marxists and Libertarians in regards to Bush. A conservative would never use such barking moonbat rhetoric.
A conservative would never march with Marxists or the anti-American war traitors but a libertarian will and does all of the time.
Let me ask you why it is that in all the years since the Civil War it is that all of you libertarians who are suffering from Lincoln Derangement Syndrome have not made any Amendments to the Constitution at all in order to sure up your right to secession?
Personally I believe it is because you really have no interest in it at all but instead have been too busy getting cozy with the progressive Marxists in bashing Bush just as you still like to bash Lincoln.