The Confederate constitution explicitly established slavery. Does that mean the Confederate government was explicitly unjust because it lacked the consent of the slaves?
Prepare to be bombarded with excremental nonsense about how the United States Constitution “enshrined” the practice and legitimacy of slavery.
“The Confederate constitution explicitly established slavery. Does that mean the Confederate government was explicitly unjust because it lacked the consent of the slaves?”
Is your use of the word “explicitly” gratuitous, or are you deliberately contouring the discussion in a way that avoids the uncomfortable fact that the United States constitution included pro-slavery provisions?
Here we are once again focusing on Confederate slavery and completely ignoring Union slavery that existed for "Four Score and Seven years.
The US constitution protected slavery too, but it didn't do it explicitly, it did it through indirect weasel words meant to cloud the fact that it was protecting slavery.
But it protected slavery.
Had the confederates never declared independence, the Union Constitution would have continued protecting slavery, because the Union was a slave Union.
So people like you come along and go "Oh my God! There's slavery in the South! We have to wait till they secede, so that we can DESTROY SLAVERY!!!"
Bullsh*t. I call bullsh*t because the Union never had any intention of eradicating slavery, and it was not their goal for the war at all. The fact that it happened two years into the war does not make it the sole nail on which you can hang justification for invading and murdering people to control their money and commerce.
You people trot out slavery because you literally dare not look beyond that fig leaf. The war was about power and money for New York and Washington DC, and when the Confederates threatened their money stream, they deliberately provoked a war to stop it.