Actually, those are the facts.
It is Confederate revisionist history that has distorted the truth of what the Confederacy was for and why it attempted secession.
Now, how did the legal election of Lincoln (despite his name not being allowed on Southern ballots) threaten the individual rights of the South?
The only one who had a right to revolt were the slaves.
The South split its own Democratic Party over slavery when Douglas refused to grant the South the right unlimited access to any State no matter how that State voted on slavery.
Even though Democrats voted on both sides of the issue on Tarriff's, it was slavery that broke up first the Democratic Party and then the Union.
Obviously, you are a product of public school.
You do not know the "facts".
The secessionist movement was driven by economics. The industrial north put undue tax and tarrif burdens on the agricultural south. That all began in the 1820's.
Lincoln putting slaves in the mix was a cynical effort to use a populist movement to further pressure the south.
If you think a bunch of southern poor boy white farmers went to war to preserve slavery for fewer than 1% of the plantations that owned them, you are out of your mind.
That's not "revisionist", that's true. You are the one spouting tainted history.
REVISIONISM is a DAMNyankee heresy of traditional scholarship, which came out of the MOST extreme LEFTIST/SOCIALIST (some would say COMMUNIST) lunatic fringe of northeastern, "poison ivy league", academia.
TRADITIONAL scholars of history are now & have always been either NEUTRAL or PRO-southern.
it's the DAMNyankee HATERS who are the REVISIONISTS & anti-dixie BIGOTS! (like YOU, "ftd".)
free dixie,sw