Most people would disagree.
The PC Revisionists in Academia have indeed propagandized many. That doesn't mean they are right. It is notable how you side with the Leftists here though.
The Civil War involved two issues that are legally and logically separate, but are generally conflated by most in an effort to cloud the issue. One of these is the issue of slavery. Nobody would argue today about the legal or moral legitimacy of this issue; slavery was wrong, no doubt or qualifications needed. It was tolerated because the economy of one section of the country was totally dependent on it, and the economy of the other was at least partially and indirectly dependent on it (Northern textile manufacturers relied on the supply of Southern cotton, for instance).
The other issue is less clear cut, namely whether or not states had the right to secede. The legality and morality of this issue is really in doubt, unless you think SCOTUS decisions are the final word on all issues in perpetuity. If you do, then to be consistent you must believe that abortion is legally and morally okay since Roe v Wade said it is. History is written by the victors. The North won the war, so secession is illegal as a practical matter. That does not change the fact that the Constitution does not give the Federal Government the power to force a state to remain in the Union. It does state that all powers not specifically granted to the FedGov are reserved to the states or to the people.
The Civil War fundamentally changed The US. The US was never really intended to be a true nation. The true nations were Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, etc. Today theres a good analogy to help understand the original formulation that did not exist a half century ago, namely the European Union. The EU is a group of sovereign nations that willingly gave up some of their powers for mutual benefit. The analogy with the US is exact that was precisely what our founders had in mind. Thirteen small, relatively powerless nations quibbling amongst each other would have been easy prey for British or French domination or conquest. A Union of all cooperating for the survival of all had a chance. Think of the recent Brexit vote. That was completely analogous to the SC secession vote. Would anyone today really argue that France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, et al., would be justified in a military response to prevent the UK from seceding? If you lived in Britain, how would you react if Germany or France sent troops to your country and started seizing and destroying your property?
Thats why we still question the legality and morality of secession. The South did it to preserve slavery. That gives secession a bad rap. Think Brexit rather than the Confederacy and the issue looks quite different.
Ignorant sheep follow sheep herders. Why should we care about the opinions of ignorant people who have been greatly misled by a several lifetimes of lies?