(July 8, 2013 at 1:41 pm)festive1 Wrote: Everywhere was decidedly racist during this time period, England, US, Canada. Yes, Southerners fought for their freedom... Freedom from federal government overriding state's rights. But that included their freedom to own and trade slaves, or more accurately, the freedom of the richest of them to own and trade slaves. Slavery didn't need to be mentioned explicitly by soldiers as a reason for fighting, as Southern culture was intrinsically linked and based on the institution. It wouldn't make sense if an average white Confederate soldier mentioned fighting to preserve slavery, as most Confederate soldiers didn't even own slaves. Most Southerners didn't own slaves, and the majority of slave owners owned relatively few numbers of slaves. Slaves were concentrated on the plantations, which were owned by the relatively small, elite Southern society. It was an economic issue, however, the entire Southern economy was based on an unlimited supply of free labor. Religion straddled both sides of the issue. Some used religion to justify slavery (blacks bore the "mark of Cain"), while others used religion to condemn it. Many people in the North wanted to end slavery for moral reasons, but most didn't carry the idea to blacks being equal to whites. That wouldn't become part of the agenda until quite some time later. There are a multitude of reasons leading to the Civil War, but a common thread to all of them is slavery in some shape or form.
Lincoln wanted to end slavery, but wanted to preserve the Union more. Hence why the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves who were in areas of open rebellion, instead of simply abolishing slavery outright. The Civil War would have been very different if Lincoln had lost the border states. With slaves fleeing the South and seeking refuge in the North, many Northern areas experienced violence. In large part, this was because of job competition between freedmen who were willing to work for less than whites. Just because a majority of Northerners wanted to end slavery and thought it wrong to own another human being, that doesn't mean they wanted to compete against blacks for jobs.
The main point, going back to the OP, is the North grew up, developed, changed public perceptions and attitudes, the South did not. Due in large part because of it's heritage being so intrinsically linked to slavery and a system of deeply engrained, racial hierarchy.
How do you figure the Corwin Amendment into all that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment
Lincoln's comment on it: "I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service....holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."
I would think an American history in which the South agreed to rejoin the Union on those terms would have been one in which slavery would have been perpetuated much longer, perhaps even into the 20th century.
