Since to Marx all struggles were economic in nature, and all institutions of a culture reflected the imperfect class structure of that society, it is only natural that Marxists would define the Civil War's roots as class struggle writ large. And of course, the most graphic illustrations of class struggle are the antipodal institutions of aristocracy and slavery, those institutions that historically defined the antebellum South.
The Marxists are not WRONG in their view, simply tunnel-visioned. Their narrow definition fails to appreciate the enormity of the clash, and understates the ideological fault line that has run through our "union" ever since its conception.
Thank you for your courteous post. I generally agree with your assessment, and would differ with you in my appreciation of Marxists only in this, that I think that modern Marxists are not so much "tunnel-visioned" in their approach, as supremely wilful and focused on their task-at-hand of justifying and building a Marxian superstate.
Marx no doubt thought of himself as a voice in the wilderness, but I think he might be horrified by the tendentiousness and unwillingness even to think about anything that doesn't "build socialism" by vilifying its alternatives that seems so to occupy his self-selected heirs and interpreters.
Their baleful influence on American affairs is now a matter of public record, and their repudiation and turfing-out is a matter for the intellectual community. This will be very difficult, I think, because, in my view, they are not so much a school, as the followers of Duns Scotus were, or even a cult, as they are a conspiracy against the human race.