>>9563203 (lb)

It's complicated, and goes all the way back to the Revolutionary War times. There were still loyalists in the south during that time. After the war, the South excelled in agriculture, and trade with the kingdoms back in Europe. The North was becoming more industrialized, but there are always economic growing pains that go with that.

Slavery as an institution is wrong. Period. It should have never been allowed to happen in the New World. The problem is, "you know whos" in Europe (think Pyramid) and the States owned the boats, the routes, and capitalized on the slave trade. "You know who's" that owned plantations in the South continued that practice while the North sought to distance themselves, somewhat, from those practices during the industrial revolution; which started right after the Revolutionary War.

What progressed was a deepening divide between the South and the North over things like tariffs, taxes, self-governance, and trade relationships with European countries. At one point, Europe almost got involved and backed the South because the trade relationship was lucrative (and likely because many of the plantation owners were "old school" loyalists, Pyramid families, etc.).

If you read the Bloodlines book by Springmeier, it puts a little more context into just how entrenched these "ruling class" of assholes already were in the US gov't on both sides. Lincoln didn't play ball, the war happened, and then he was assassinated. Over the decades/generations and in the South, there was (is?) still a strong sentiment to the Confederates fighting for the right to self-governance. This is a talking point where the basis of that self-governance would have been to allow the States to decide on the right to allow/abolish slavery, and leave that out of Federal talking points. There was also the issue of taxation/tariffs, naval fuckery with trade routes, and so on.

So, you can imagine that over these generations, people looked up to some of these generals/soldiers as "War Heroes" to the cause of fighting off an oppressive Federal government. In reality, it's more important to never forget these things and people so as to not repeat it. To this day, you will see people debating the war. Was the North in the right? Was the South? Depends on where you are with the issues. The root of the issue was, indeed, self-governance. At the core of that issue of self-governance, however, was the issue of slavery. For that particular time period and that particular debate, the issue of slavery is simply inexcusable. Unfortunately, the myriad of other issues concerning the "States" vs "Federal Gov't" are completely overshadowed by the issue of slavery. For most, this renders any other argument for southern apologists as moot.

That's that. Vid related is a "making a case for the South", and does not necessarily reflect this anon's perspective. However, it's interesting to hear it from both sides. Especially since the video picks apart some fairly weak arguments from a Prager U vid. There are some juicy facts that often go unmentioned because "muh slavery".