Some of us have to work, and I have spent too much time this morning on this thoroughly enjoyable trip through the looking glass as it is. Rest assured I will return. But before I go I want to be fair to you and ensure that your position is clearly stated.
May we agree that you are no longer arguing that the South seceded due to ornerous tarriffs saddled upon it by wicked Northen interests, but rather that the war was conducted due to those wicked Northern interests wishing to maintain their profits gained off the backs of beleaguered Southern plantation owners?
That has never been my argument. For the last three years, i've been pointing out that what was at stake was the bulk of European trade, and the possibility of the South capitalizing industry (with the extra money) that would compete directly with established Northern Robber Barons.
The dispute was on whether New York would continue being the seat of Empire, or whether it would fall to Southern economic challengers.
If the South had been left alone, very wealthy people in the North East were going to lose huge sums of money, and possibly even their businesses altogether. More than enough motive to bring down the fire.