>>> You might want to brush up on your pre-civil war history just a wee bit.....
Feel free to educate me.
No doubt there were several states rights issues which were testing the resolve of the states against the federal government... but it was state condoned slavery which defined the war front.
If it was not a state’s choice to comply or reject Lincoln’s anti-slavery edict that defined them as confederate or union, then what was it?
“If it was not a state’s choice to comply or reject Lincoln’s anti-slavery edict that defined them as confederate or union, then what was it?”
Secession. The Emancipation Proclamation did jack for slaves in Union controlled areas. It was a failed attempted - well into the war - to raise a fifth column.
The Union did not free the last of its own slaves until the winter of 1865-1866, and then went on to spread justice and freedom to the Sioux, Cheyenne, Crow, Comanche, Nez Perce etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.
Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.
I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.
Yours,
A. Lincoln.
The right of the states to conduct their internal affairs as their citizens saw fit was the primary cause of the war. When it became apparent to southerners that their agrarian society was being threatened by their "rulers in the north" they chose to secede, but the Federal gumbint refused to recognize the right to secession. Many unconstitutional acts by the Federal gumbint, such as the suspension of Habeas corpus followed. No state would have ever joined the union if they thought that they couldn't secede if and when the far off Federal gubmint got too big for their britches. There were many southerners who despised slavery just as much as northerners, but the mostly rural southerners were very accustomed to doing for themselves without Uncle Sugar intervening. This is still true to this very day. We see it in every election. Northerners tend to favor large gubmint. Southerners tend to want to be left alone. There were many other factors besides slavery that brought on the "war of northern aggression" including, but not limited to taxation, societal differences between the industrialized north and the agrarian south, and, of course, primary reason of the southern states believing (rightfully so) that they had the right to conduct their affairs under their own laws without interference from the Federal gubmint. The notion of limited Federal gubmint was something people in the south of that time truly believed in. Remember, it had only been a little over 70 years since the Revolutionary War and the principles that founded this nation were still very fresh in people's minds, especially in the south because many of the final battles of the Revolutionary War were fought in the south. Slavery was certainly part of the equation, but it was by no means the only cause of the war, although revisionist historians would love to have you believe that as fact, especially revisionist historians who are sympathetic to a large centralized gubmint.....