“A rather idiotic suggestion, given the times. There were 15 slave states. If they had not ratified it would have taken 31 states voting to ratify. Do the math.”
In other words, the northern states did not have the votes.
Did not have the votes to peacefully amend the constitution.
Did not have the votes to peacefully overthrow the slavery provisions that the northern states earlier enshrined in the US constitution.
And lacking the votes, northern states did the next best thing - took up an army to overthrow the constitution’s slavery provisions, often popularized “as He died to make men holy let us die to make men free.”
Northern states taking up an army to overthrow the US constitution had an added benefit - the opportunity to destroy - kill you might say - economic and political rivals in the south.
Wrong. Lacking the votes the north, under Buchanan and carried forward by Lincoln, did nothing until attacked by the rebels.
Your attempts to distort by broad-brush noted, you would have us believe that there was some sort of concerted effort toward national emancipation. There wasn't. Northern states had largely resolved the issue internally (state by state) through legislation. In their view how the southern state conducted their affairs was their own business.
A state of detente have been achieved between slave states and free states, there was no urgency to do anything more until the southern fire-eaters launched their Civil War against the north.
Why are you suddenly surprised to learn that?
And lacking the votes, northern states did the next best thing - took up an army to overthrow the constitution’s slavery provisions, often popularized “as He died to make men holy let us die to make men free.”
No, they took up an army to fight the war that the South forced upon them.
Northern states taking up an army to overthrow the US constitution had an added benefit - the opportunity to destroy - kill you might say - economic and political rivals in the south.
How exactly did they "overthrow the U.S. Constitution"?