It was about money. That is all it was about. Money that would have moved from the control of New York and Washington DC, to the control of New Orleans, Mobile, Charleston and other southern port cities.
In the south it is called the war of northern aggression.
That's because the Northern armies invaded them with the intent to destroy their independence and reestablish control by Washington DC.
It was the North that marched armies into the other's homeland, so yes, the "War of Northern Aggression" is actually more accurate.
“It was about money. That is all it was about. Money that would have moved from the control of New York and Washington DC, to the control of New Orleans, Mobile, Charleston and other southern port cities.”
The south would have been prosperous without slavery?
The north would not have invaded if there had not been slavery
I’ve never heard a logical argument against this.