Many of course would argue that.
I know. I've read them. Haven't seen a convincing argument yet that passes Occam's Razor. Let me know if anyone comes up with anything new, like primary source evidence that supports them.
Until then, it's just Lew Rockwell agitprop. The Lost Cause types seem to need a villain to make them seem validated. Trouble is, most of the big figures of the Civil War, on both sides, were just doing what they saw as the demands of God, Duty and Honor. Lincoln, Lee, Grant, Davis; they were more alike than different.
Many of course would argue that.
President Lincoln is often bashed by the neo-rebs for supporting a constitutional amendment in his inaugural address that supported the maintenance of the domestic institutions of the states, i.e. slavery. What this shows of course is that he bent over backwards to avoid war.
The slavers had their slaves, but that wasn't enough. Only -expansion- of slavery would keep their ponzi scheme going. Lincoln opposed expansion of slavery, so war was the only option the slave power saw to maintain their slave empire.
They sowed the wind, and they reaped the whirlwind.
Walt