“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.
>>> Secession.
Why did they secede?
The Emancipation Proclamation was a successful maneuver that kept the British from supporting the Confederacy with arms and munitions, and naval assistance, if not soldiers.
Britain had wanted to trade directly with the South so as to get cheaper cotton. The Northern voters voted for high cotton tariffs that cost British buyers a lot of money. Britain had an economic interest in trading directly with a free Confederate nation of Southern states.
The British people were very anti-slavery, having demanded an end to slavery in Britain not 25 years before.
With the Emancipation Proclamation stating that all Southern slaves were free men, he boxed the British government into either supporting Confederate slave practice and alienating the British subjects, or appealing to the British people by not supporting the Confederacy.
It was a brilliant move by Lincoln that kept the British on the sidelines. It was never intended to free anybody as it carried no weight of enforcement. It was a shrewd political move.
correct
those slaves were not freed up there and they really made a lot of profit off slavery.
many forget how justice was then given tot he indians but also that justice was also going on out west during the war for southern independence