This a very interesting interpretation. In effect, taking away slaves from the plantation was exactly what Rome did to Carthage -- salt their fields to kill their agriculture and their economy.
Of course, the North has an interest in ensuring the "peace" was permanent and they wouldn't have to fight the Confederacy as second time. But killing their industry certainly sounds like destroying their future.
Are you saying former slaves had the right to vote but Southern whites did not? Never heard that before.
You won't hear of it because it doesn't fit the narrative people want to believe. It's true. The edict went out that all people who had been in "rebellion" were disenfranchised, and only those who had not been in rebellion were allowed to vote.
This effectively meant whites in the South were not allowed to vote, and former slaves were. This had the effect of electing nearly entire black legislatures to several states, and black congressmen to the congress.
Years ago I had a history book that covered this aspect of the aftermath of the Civil war, but I haven't seen it in any books since then, and I have long noticed how difficult it is to find information on the topic. People simply do not want to admit this section of history happened. I found this. It isn't much, but it somewhat confirms what i've been saying on this point.
According to the book I had, (which I believe was published in the 1960s) the whole thing turned into a farce, because former slaves did not know how to be legislators. They would show up dressed in their best clothes, and they would speak in very courtly manners to each other, but they would then do little else.
Eventually their behavior became an embarrassment to the Federals and so they eventually relinquished control and began allowing whites to vote again.