After all, two very different causes… but, still… both acted in what amounts to be conspiracy with the intent to commit treason… against the Commonwealth of Virginia.
I find it incredibly strange how some seem to forgive and forget (heck, many probably aren’t aware of Henry A. Wise and his actions, at all) when it comes to measuring Wise against the letter of the law, and yet can’t seem to let the letter of the law go with John Brown. Is it that convenient for those who embrace the memory of the Confederacy in relation to Virginia? I mean, if one considers Wise’s actions as significant in Virginia’s decision to secede, and that this leading to Virginia’s ties to the Confederacy is an overall good thing to reflect upon and remember… then how is it that many of those same folks look down upon Brown’s actions at Harper’s Ferry, and it’s significance in the history of abolition and the eventual emancipation of slaves? Seems Brown and Wise were doing the same thing, but working toward very different ends. Which one, really, was good… and which one bad?
Cenantua's Blog 
jgo
April 27, 2011
Several years back I ran across articles reporting on some psychological research that showed, for instance, that people interpret the actions of relatives in the best possible light, while others do not. The same is true of political birds of a feather. Parents and partisans and members of a police force or small military unit, especially, can be extremely forgiving of their own and extremely quick to condemn “others” no matter how innocent or guilty they may seem to third parties.
That razor’s edge when it comes to a crucial minor action, can lead to even wider impressions of both parties’ actions which follow.
And all sides can be deeply entrenched in the feeling that what they and theirs did/ are doing is purely defensive in nature, while those other guys initiated force or fraud for no good reason whatsoever.