|
There is actually a pretty large difference between secession and the colonial rebellion. Most importantly is the matter of consent. The Southern States agreed to join the US willingly. The Colonies were always de facto self governing until the generation right before the revolution. Consent of the governed is a big deal. Also, the match point for the revolution occured when the King's men tried to seize the militia's stores. The match point of the Civil War was when the militia shelled federal troops.
There also arises the awkward question of Federal property in the south. There were huge chunks of land, supplies, forts, etc. that were owned by the national government. Even if secession were allowed, the states that left would have to pay full price for that stuff.
Additionally, I think that there is a fairly simple reason to go to war to keep the south: it keeps the north safer. Look, the odds of there being totally peaceful coexistence between the north and the south, especially with the slavery issue unresolved, is at best unlikely.
To answer the question: if the US had allowed the CSA to secede, and then gone to war? We'd have been ass deep in European interference.
|