Wrong. There are many scholarly (that is, written by other than elitist Yankee oligarch university professors) works, which document the history of increasing selective tariffs on export products of the South. The major one being cotton, exported to England’s factories vs. northern textile mills. Slavery was a capital issue in the production of cotton. In the absence of the tariffs imposed to force cheap cotton coming to the north, as opposed to the premium prices England was paying, the issue of slavery would have been compromised upon, and this was in the works. The condition of freed slaves demonstrates the lack of concern the north had for them. This war was a power grab, both of land and property of the Southern states and for control of the coming expansion to the West by the railroads, where slavery took on other ethnic suasions (Chinese coolies). Slavery was a subject of ambivalence to northern industrialists -they wished they could have such cheap labor. Disparity in population of South vs. North allowed this political power bloc to have their way. Through tariffs they were strangling the producers, and the Southern producing class had the means to secede, and did so to get away from these oligarchs.
Southern producing class
<><><><><
LOL. You, of course, by the term Southern producing class, mean African slaves.
Name one.
“Wrong. There are many scholarly (that is, written by other than elitist Yankee oligarch university professors) works, which document the history of increasing selective tariffs on export products of the South. The major one being cotton, exported to England’s factories vs. northern textile mills. ... Through tariffs they were strangling the producers, and the Southern producing class had the means to secede, and did so to get away from these oligarchs.”
Bingo. You are exactly right. The primary basis for the Civil War, IMHO. Slavery was indeed an important issue, just not the primary one.