Replies

The North went to war to preserve the Union. The abolitionist movement was also a factor, many in the North wanted it ended. Slavery had been ended in the North. The South choose violent secession to preserve it.

Slavery had been ended in the North.

Those four Union slave states sort of undermine your contention.

The North went to war to preserve the Union. The abolitionist movement was also a factor, many in the North wanted it ended. Slavery had been ended in the North. The South choose violent secession to preserve it. False. Abolitionists routinely got drubbed in elections in the North. The vast vast majority of the population including Lincoln were not abolitionists. The South did not choose violent secession. They seceded peacefully. Furthermore they did not choose secession to preserve slavery. Slavery was not threatened. If anybody thought it was, the North offered to expressly protect slavery in the US Constitution effectively forever. So much for abolitionism have much influence up North.

The Hidden History of Slavery in NY.

https://www.thenation.com/article/hidden-history-slavery-new-york/

In 1991 excavators for a new federal office building in Manhattan unearthed the remains of more than 400 Africans stacked in wooden boxes sixteen to twenty-eight feet below street level. The cemetery dated back to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and its discovery ignited an effort by many Northerners to uncover the history of the institutional complicity with slavery. In 2000 Aetna, one of Connecticut’s largest companies, apologized for profiting from slavery by issuing insurance policies on slaves in the 1850s. After a four-month investigation into its archives, Connecticut’s largest newspaper, the Hartford Courant, apologized for selling advertisement space in its pages for the sale of slaves in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. And in 2004 Ruth Simmons, president of Brown University, established the Steering Committee on Slavery and Justice to investigate “and discuss an uncomfortable piece” of the university’s history: The construction of the university’s first building in 1764, reads a university press release, “involved the labor of Providence area slaves.”

Now another blue-blooded institution–the New-York Historical Society–has joined this important public engagement with our past by mounting an ambitious exhibition, “Slavery in New York.” To all those who think slavery was a “Southern thing,” think again. In 1703, 42 percent of New York’s households had slaves, much more than Philadelphia and Boston combined. Among the colonies’ cities, only Charleston, South Carolina, had more.

lavery had been ended in the North.

This is incorrect. Slavery ended in the South in April of 1861, but it took until December of 1861 to end it in the North.

Slavery lasted 8 months longer in the Union than it did in the Confederacy.

The South choose violent secession to preserve it.

That is just cognitive dissonance. Slavery was completely safe in the Union. I've heard this claim of "secession to preserve slavery", but staying IN the Union would preserve slavery.

The claim is nonsense. The South had all the slavery it could want while in the Union. The South didn't secede to "preserve" what was already preserved by Constitutional law. This is just a made up propaganda claim that doesn't even make sense when you actually think about it.