[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Still, we will continue to disagree the war was about slavery or the south protecting slaves, leaving the union over slaves.
The industrial North for years leading up to the war wanted tariffs. The South believed in free trade, the North didn't.

It wanted to
force the South to buy their goods. Lincoln said the Morrill tariff was the most important issue in the US in his campaign, that he would pass it.
Add the issue with new states being slave or free, it became an issue of political power and votes. Certainly the tariffs were a big part of SC succeeding.

"Robert Barnwell Rhett similarly railed against the then-pending Morrill Tariff before the South Carolina convention. Rhett included a lengthy attack on tariffs in the Address of South Carolina to Slaveholding States, which the convention adopted on December 25, 1860 to accompany its secession ordinance.

We do know the North as a whole had no issue over slavery. If the South hadn't left and Morrill passed, it would've been a great benefit to the North.

And the Republicans were also widely known as the "Party of Abolition". You conveniently don't mention that at all.

Originally Posted by Armistead

Succession was a preventive measure, states tired of the industrial protectionism policies the North was pushing on the South for their own benefit.

Really? So why did they seceed again? What did they say? I guess I really do have to do this again.

Texas:

In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.

https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abou.../2feb1861.html

South Carolina:

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

Mississippi:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp

Florida:

WHEREAS, anti-slavery agitation persistently continued in the non-slaveholding States of this Union...

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/florida-dec.htm

So tell me again why they seceeded?

Why do you think it was so easy for the North to enslave the indians after they freed the slaves? I think Sherman said it well. " indians are worse
than {insert N word}" They stood in the way of railroads and northern industry.

Possibly true, but what does that have to do with secession or the Confederate flag?

I'm not saying the US government has always been the good guy. Not in the least. You keep piling up arguments that it was all somebody else's fault, and keep trying to show evidence that has little or nothing to do with what they actually said at the time. All I wanted to do was stick with the 'Flag' topic.