“Besides, the Civil War was not primarily about slavery. Lincoln did that mid-war as a PR move.”
That’s odd.
Just prior to the Confederate’s attack on Fort Sumter, CSA Vice President Alexander Stephens said the exact opposite. He was clear is his statement that the secession was about slavery.
And, the “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union” clearly states that slavery was the primary factor for their withdraw from the Union.
So, South Carolina was the only state to secede....I see....
That's odd, because the Union *HAD* slavery. As a matter of fact, Slavery lasted longer in the Union than it did in the Confederacy. If the Union was fighting to stop slavery, why didn't they destroy their own states of Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware?
As a matter of fact, Lincoln supported the Corwin amendment which would have made it impossible to prohibit slavery in the Union.
So what was the Union fighting for? Why did they invade and kill all those people?
The one thing that it was clearly not about was slavery.
It was about money. The South leaving cost the North 200 million dollars in European trade. The South also payed 3/4ths of all the taxes of the Nation in 1860.
So yeah, the Union invaded the South to keep them from taking that 200 million dollars per year in trade away from the North, and to keep the South from undercutting their markets in the US.