"Had there been no slavery, there would have been no war. Had there been no moral condemnation of slavery, there would have been no war." - Sydney E. Ahlstrome
The 18th-century Southern economy was not based on states' rights. Neither was their society. The majority of Southern men would have told you they would like very much to own slaves, but only the most elite did. The Southern economy
was based on slavery.
Although the majority of Southerners had little interest in slaves, slavery was a primary interest of Southern politicians--and consequently the underlying cause of the South's desire to seek independence and state rights.
members.tripod.com/~greatamericanhistory/gr02013.htm
Although this site also says:
So-was the war about slavery? Absolutely. If there had been no disagreement over the issue of slavery, the South would probably not have discerned a threat to its culture and the southern politicians would have been much less likely to seek "their right to secede." But was it only about slavery? No. It was also about the constitutional argument over whether or not a state had a right to leave the Union, and--of primary concern to most southern soldiers--the continuation of antebellum southern culture.
So as I said: the war was primarily about slavery.
In effect, any Confederate soldier was: yes, defending his homeland, but also essentially defending slavery.
Lord Mhoram,
