In a word:
Jefferson, author of the US Declaration of Independence, argued for the right of a people to change governments, to secede, if they weren’t free, happy, healthy, prosperous under the old one. (Jefferson, Albert J. Nock’s bio is great.)
Lincoln, CEO of the Union in the Civil War, enforced by violence the position that once the states had joined the Union, they could not un-join. It didn’t matter if they were free, happy, healthy, prosperous. (Thomas J. DiLorenzo’s bio is great: The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.)
Me: I’m for liberty, not for union by force. I’m for no government: no state-imposed government that is: so there should be nothing to secede from!
People organizing a postal service, communal irrigation, sewers, waste disposal … a network … are forms of government; states are something distinct, parasitic.
Further: Lincoln is the chief terrorist — state terror — for the ages. I’ll concede that we’re lucky to be here at all, regardless of how captive we are; or, maybe not. Maybe we should all just take our medicine for sins of the past, and just see if anyone is still left alive. Global warming counts; who’s in a White House does not.
I’m switching Macs, have Not succeeded yet in transferring data, apps, from the old Mac mini to the new one. I’ll add links and so forth when I can.
more coming: Lincoln’s Legacy of State Terror
My current reading is fabulous on both of these important presidents. Lincoln has been news since the 1860s, very much so recently as everyone logs on to hail Abe as the great guy, honor the current movie, genuflect.
Thomas DiLorenzo’s book on Lincoln drops its jaw on the industry of revisionist Lincoln “scholarship.” I still want to read the Sandberg biography of Lincoln, but I’m really glad to be reading the DiLorenzo!)