You've asserted that everything is viewed through the lens of slavery as if it were some sort of unquestionable "fact," used that purported "fact" to respond to counterexamples offered by others including myself and LG such as nullification, and upon responding declared your "fact" validated by itself. That's called affirming the consequent, LS.
Have you no interest whatsoever in the MULTITUDES of studies of southern laws, local communities, etc., that overwhelmingly place slavery at the core of their being?
Did I ever suggest they should be ignored? No. I did not. I simply chose not to engage in single-minded obsessions over slavery to the point that I habitually introduce it as the end-all single issue explanation for every last historical event that happened in the southern United States between the years 1789 and 1861. If and when its relevance to a topic deems its necessary to examine slavery, I'm perfectly content to do so. That's called responsible contextualization.
But when you start making far fetched interpretations of a discussion over U.S. tariff policy to the effect that slavery is said to be the underlying explanatory instrument by way of the export trade's connection to its agricultural suppliers who are in turn connected to slavery by way of a absolutist and reductionist argument around the labor component of their production functions, it becomes a problem.
Your slavery reductionism, in its raw form, is little more than a direct variant on what turned out to be the fatal flaw of marxism: labor reductionism. Marx's single-issue reductionist approach to history attempted to explain the entirity of human interaction as the product of an inherent struggle between the labor portion of the capitalist's production function and the owners of production, concluding that nearly anything and everything the producers did was explainable as a part of their exploitation patterns. The only difference between that and your own view of the south is that you specify those laborers as slaves then proceed to the exact same end as Marx.
"Speaking-truth-to-shower" concurring bump.
Resorts to reductionism witness to a thinly-equipped toolbox, or an enthusiastic hammer-murderer who's happy in his work.