[CaptainHaplo]

Because people with money called the shots in that farce of a government.

So the rich and powerful were only to be found in the CSA, while the North was run by paupers who only had the welfare of the people in their hearts and minds? Things are rarely that black and white - and a look at history shows that your idealism in viewing that time frame is misplaced.

The grunts fought to "defend their homes" which is exactly what the ones trying to keep slavery alive wanted.

It is often said that the Civil War was a war that tore apart families - not only due to the deaths and injuries - but because it pitted brother against brother due to the ways people saw things. This idea that "the rich" had everyone snookered is further demonstration that you have swalled a revisionist version of history.

Its not the history of an area but a type of government a government founded on keeping slavery alive for the benefit of the rich.

You seem intent on your view regarding slavery. So answer the questions that have already been posed - if the issue was slavery, why did the North continue the practice of slavery after the war began? If it was over slavery - the North would have stopped said practice - and it did not. Secondly - why is it the Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves ONLY in the states and areas that were rebelling against the Union (Federal) government, yet kept slavery as a legal institution in the "Northern" states?

At first glance, your view on slavery as being a "North/South" issue would appear to be flawed given historical facts. Care to try and explain this discrepency?