chattal slavery was written into the US constitution as wellThat's shear nonsense. The US Constitution acknowledged the existence of slavery in an off-hand manner and made no attempt to outlaw it. That's a far-cry from the explicit endorsements of the practice visible in the rebels' constitutional manifesto. Show me where the United States Constitution contains the following clauses:
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.
The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves, lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
You have to wake up and face reality: The South did indeed fight for its freedom -- the freedom to deny freedom to those who would be free. You speculate that slavery "was in its way out," apparently monumental ignoring Southern efforts to extend the practice to new territories, rather than reduce its scope. That speculation may be true or it may be unfounded, but it is certainly irrelevent. The unavoidable fact is that Southerners rebelled against the Government when they feared that their absolute freedom to enslave their fellow human beings might be endangered, and that effort was properly suppressed.
the radical republicans were about IMPERIALIST hemisphere-wide expansion.
That claim is simply silly, and demonstrative of your manifest ignorance. If you look at the historical record, you'll find that expansionism was most prominent among Southern Democrats, who agitated, even after the Civil War, for the annexation of all-Mexico and Cuba. The Whigs and, later, the Republicans were the only voice speaking out against out-right imperialism. It wasn't always a popular position, but it was effective. Republicans didn't adopt "imperialism" in any sense of the word until the 1890s -- just look at the profound Republican opposition to the purchase of Alaska and the annexation of Hawaii for proof.
You have to wake up and face reality: The South did indeed fight for its freedom -- the freedom to deny freedom to those who would be free. That's what I'm saying! I pose that if you are fighting for your freedom, yet your freedom is the "freedom" to enslave others, then you're not fighting for "freedom" at all. In essence, you are fighting for slavery!
Isn't that right? I can't see how pure and honest logic would dictate otherwise.
And to have those among us today who would justify slavery while talking about freedom simultaneously draws a doubletake. And that logic is the literal meaning of the acronym "S.N.A.F.U."
No mercy.
Coming soon: Tha SYNDICATE.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.