At the core of Lincoln’s presidency was the issue of slavery and at the core of the civil war was the issue of slavery. Certainly, not every one was fighting for (or against) slavery, but at the very least they were fighting for (or against) the ancillary issues caused by slavery. I.E.-financial issues, states rights issues, succession issues, and yes,,,,,the moral issue of slavery, The point being that none of these things would have formented into the political storm that became the Civil War without the issue of slavery at its core.
I do agree that things are more complicated than today’s liberal historians make it seem. Robert E. Lee thought llittle of slavery, but strongly believed in his nation of Virginia. States rights was a core issue that brought many people to the battle field as well....most certainly. But, states rights to have slavery? To this day, a very reasonable political position is tainted with the stain of slavery.
Make no mistake. Lincoln had as an objective to get rid of slavery because getting rid of it solved so many other problems and really allowed our country to become what it is today. It’s too bad he wasn’t able to serve out his second term. It is very likely the KKK would not have risen and Jim Crowe laws would not have taken root if Lincoln lived just a few more years....that’s how significant and influential leader the man was.
Sadly, the legacy of slavery lives on to this day. Liberals use it as a battering ram against very reasonable political accommodations, against the police, as a means to excuse inner-city crime, and as a way to make a lot of otherwise very smart people feel guilty about simply holding people of color to high standards.
“At the core of Lincoln’s presidency was the issue of slavery “
Except is wasn’t. His inaugural address said so.
So say you. However the facts do not support that conclusion.