Bravo Sierra. YOU are the one espousing the white separatist ideals of Lincoln, and ingonoring his oft repeated comments about NON-INTEREFERENCE with slavery. He wanted the money, plain and simple, and waged war to prevent utter economic devastation to the North:
The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.And this on SLAVERY:
I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.
bttt
It should be abundantly clear, even to you, that slavery and white supremacy were the primary motivators for southern secession. One need only read the comments made by southerners, to southerners, explaining their reasons for secession during the critical winter of 1860-61, to understand that the "states' rights" argument is after-the-fact apologia. The surviving presentations, speeches, reports, pamphlets, etc., tell the story much better than I ever could - in the southerners own words.
"The final South Carolina mission in this initial wave of activity was former congressman John McQueen's journey to Texas. McQueen, a Bennettsville, South Carolina, lawyer, had served in Congress throughout the decade of the 1850's. His political views were at the radical end of the South Carolina spectrum, and he was one of the congressmen who signed the "Southern Manifesto" ....
"Before he could leave Washington, however, McQueen received a letter from a group of Richmond civic leaders inviting him and his fellow South Carolinians to stop off in the Virginia capital for a testimonial dinner .... McQueen graciously declined; his wife was ill, and most of his colleagues had already departed. But he took pains to thank the Richmonders for their expression of solidarity with his home state: 'I have never doubted what Virginia would do when the alternatives present themselves to her intelligent and gallant people, to choose between an association with her Southern sisters [or] the dominion of a people who have chosen their leader - Abraham Lincoln - upon the single idea that the African is equal to the Anglo-Saxon, and with the purpose of placing our slaves on [a position of] equality with ourselves and our friends of every condition....'
"'We, of South Carolina, hope soon to greet you in a Southern Confederacy, where white men shall rule our destinies, and from which we may transmit to our posterity the rights, privileges, and honors left us by our ancestors.'"
"Commissioner McQueen struck the same chord when he addressed the Texas Convention on February 1, 1861. 'Lincoln was elected by a sectional vote, whose platform was that of the Black Republican party and whose policy was to be the abolition of slavery upon this continent and the elevation of our own slaves to an equality with ourselves and our children....'Apostles of Disunion, pgs 47-49. The white southerners of 1860-61 seemed quite convinced that Lincoln was hellbent on marrying off their daughters to their former slaves, and that he intended to elevate former slaves to a position of with them. Of course, there were no "former" slaves because of anything the Lincoln Administration had done, at that point in time, because there would not be a Lincoln Adminstration until March 1861. Dew shows that very little was ever said about tariffs and states' rights by the Commissioners, during the winter of 1860-61. However, a great was said about slavery, fugitive slave laws, race equality, and wounded southern "honor."
BTW Prof. Dew is a son of the south; a Floridian and Virginian suckled on the myths of the lost cause. During his research on this subject (the secession commissioners), as the evidence mounted, he had cause to ask himself, "Could secession and racism be so intimately connected?" The answer was clear. "Like Jefferson Davis and Alexander H Stephens in their postwar writings, [other southern authors tried] to reframe the causes of the conflict in terms that would be much more favorable to the South." The truth of the matter was that, "The comissioners were arguing that disunion, even if it meant risking war, was the only way to save the white race."
That was the southerners point of view - not Lincoln's.
What a horrible thing for a President to do!
Was Lincoln going to allow the expansion of slavery into the territories?
That was the issue that the South was upset about, that they were not going to be able to expand their despotism.
And you are the one supporting the white supremecist regime of Jefferson Davis with it's belief in the superiority of whites over blacks, and that the proper place for blacks was in bondage. Which is worse?