Estimates are that over 40% of households in Mississippi and South Carolina owned slaves and over 30% of households in Georgia, Alabama, and Florida owned slaves. Those are significant numbers, and those were the states that sparked the secession movement.
Further north, fewer families owned slaves and there was less support for secession. For Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas, things were more complicated. Those states only seceded after war had begun, but for the Deep South states, what rights were they worried about? Chiefly the “right” to own slaves.
Lincoln didn’t say he would take slaves away and he wouldn’t, but the idea that a party that was opposed to slavery would control the White House and Congress was seen as a threat by slaveowners and other secessionists. By appointing federal officials in the South, Lincoln, it was believed, would build up an anti-slavery Republican Party in the South that would ultimately threaten to abolish slavery state by state.
For many ordinary Southerners, the conflict was more about “us versus them,” but slavery was an important issue and at the root of the increasing division in the country. Neither elites nor ordinary people were that concerned about tariffs. Had the Southern states’ representatives remained in Congress, tariffs wouldn’t have gone up as much as they did.
Yes, it was -- which, even according to your numbers (which may or may not be accurate), was roughly 70% of the people who DID NOT own slaves. "Us vs them" is pretty much a common human trait. Especially for a relatively independent-minded group of people who settled and worked that land.
Slavery was not the predominant theme for that 70%. A consideration? Yes. But, it was just one of many issues that contributed to the "us vs. them" mentality and certainly not the dominant issue.
Frankly, to a somewhat lesser extent, it still exists today.
Neither elites nor ordinary people were that concerned about tariffs.
You don't know that, and neither do I. Even if you are correct (big if) it was the real or perceived economic impact of those tariffs -- just like today.
Bottom line: slavery was just one of so many issues and not necessarily the most significant. The South just wanted out of the deal/partnership because of many issues. To them, it was not working out as it was presented and agreed upon in 1776.
Why is that so hard to understand?
The relevant question here is "Did states have a right to secede?"
If the answer is "no", then their reasons for wanting to secede, don't matter.
If the answer is "yes", then their reasons for wanting to secede, don't matter.
I will wait for you to find a flaw in my logic.
How did this issue play into the secession crises of 1828?