Talking about it and rejecting it is a far different matter from unilaterially declaring it, then starting shooting.
** South Carolina seriously considered seceding, but this was avoided by the intervention of John C. Calhoun (again long before the CW)
Given that Calhoun was the driving force behind the Nullification Crisis, that's an odd reading of the story. Henry Clay (Lincoln's political idol) generally gets credit for engineering the compromise that ended the crisis. But if you want to call Calhoun blinking when Andrew Jackson threatened to come down there and hang him "intervention," fine by me.
** The majority of Southern plantations were not profitable annually, and often required financial assistance, which was provided by the North (at a substantial profit).
I'd like to see how that worked. The fact is that some plantation owners, like farmers today, sometimes had to borrow money. Northern banks land brokers loaned it to them in return for futures on their crops. You're basically pointing to a modern commodities market and saying it's exploiting the south.
* Most of the slave ships were operated by Northern Captains and again at a substantial profit.
Actually American ships were a minor part of the big picture of the slave trade. The Brits and the Portugese comprised something like 90% of the trade. Further, the slave trade into the US after the Revolution was only a minor contribution to the overall number of slaves in the country. So blame the Brits again. But, yes, many slave ships sailed from northern ports and it was a profitable business. So profitable that smuggling continued to feed the demand in the south (and the Caribbean and South America) even after the trade had been outlawed.
** The North had passed high tariff laws primarily because of their adverse affect on the southern states.
Bull. They passed them to protect American industry against the Europeans, who were ahead of us industrially. Call them crazy, but the Republicans believed that promoting industry was important.
** Northern factories refused to open up in the south, due in part for the desire to keep the south from improving its over all lot.
Northern factories refused to open in the south because they were in the north. This wasn't the days of GM opening a new plant in Smyrna. Factories were built by individual entrepreneurs and they were one-offs. Why didn't southern capital open their own factories? The answer is because they were getting rich already off cotton growing.
** Lincoln felt it was his duty to uphold the Constitution, above all other questions. Since slavery was Constitutional, he was willing to allow it to stand.
Where it existed. The south insisted on being able to take slavery into the territories. There was even talk that Dred Scott meant that no state had the power to prevent slavery within their own borders. One slavery advocate boasted that they'd be having slave auctions on Boston Common again.
** Early in the CW it was common for Union officers to grant emancipation to local slaves, after the CSA had been driven out. Lincoln overruled these orders and wrote orders that this practice be stopped.
Because it wasn't legal, the way he saw it, and , yes, at that early point in the war he was still hoping to end things peacefully if the southern states would return to the union.
** Jefferson Davis owned 75 (this was in the 1850's) slaves but forbade corporal punishment of them and declared that punishment of the slaves would be decided upon by the slaves themselves.
What a guy. He didn't beat his 75 slaves.
** When Davis was gone for long periods (as he often was) the man in charge of the plantation was a slave who was his most trusted assistant.
And if the man had failed him, Davis had the power to sell his wife and kids and make sure he never saw them again.
There are always three sides to every issue, in this case: the norths, the South's and the truth.
Neither side holds a monopoly on the truth. One reason I recommended the book that I did is that he writes in from neither the North or the Souths POV, thus giving more credibility to his perspective.
Indeed. Why didn't the South build their own fleet of trading ships rather than rely on the North for their shipping needs?
Your obvious sarcasm not withstanding it always seems unfair to me to judge people of yesteryear's, by the standards of today. If we did that to some monumental people, even in recent history, few would measure up.
One case in point would be FDR, not just for the internment of US citizens and the stealing of their property (under the guise of 'failure to pay taxes), but also for the economic policies he both implemented in some cases and other policies that he failed to implement. His actions combined led this country down a decline which has no comparable economic catastrophe in modern (post 1900) times. Yet we honor this man with a memorial?
I consider the Presidential performance of FDR from 1933 to 1941 to be probably the worse Presidential period in history and any Right thinking person on this board should concur.
As to Davis, his actions regarding the treatment of slaves, was not only legal at the time, but was far ahead of his colleagues.
And if the man had failed him, Davis had the power to sell his wife and kids and make sure he never saw them again.
Yes, all slave owners had that power, Washington, Jefferson among them. However, Davis denied himself that power and issued instructions that families not only not be broken up, but that they also be housed together.
You seem like a fair person (unlike some others on this thread), you should take the time to buy the book (I receive no commission [ ;) ]) and improve your knowledge on the subject, it may open your eyes a bit.