That coincides with my own belief on the cause of the Civil War. It was more about states' rights than about abolition. Even these days, the seeds of that conflict lay dormant but not dead. Overweening federal control could very well spark another secessionist movement, this time with much different results. I suspect that much of the Midwest would join the South this time around, and that would leave the liberal enclaves -- not exactly noted for their spirit of cooperation -- to hold the Union together.
In other words even the Northern States wanted to keep their "options open" if things did not work out.
See 18
If slavery was not an important reason for the South's succession, then why didn't the South abolish slavery on its own accord? No one was forcing them to be slave states.
I agree that big government is taking over Americans' lives more than ever before, but I think this new internal war will not be regional, but will be fought by the scattered masses of freedom-minded individuals from all over our great nation.
You are correct. This is why the Civil War is so contorted in Liberal teaching; to foster hatred of blacks toward whites, rather than admit that the current socialist trends were EXACTLY what led to the first Civil War. States rebelled against big government, and interference with peoples' choices of their state rights.
Similarly, today's issue of ILLEGALS parallels the State's rights issues, where Federal law is being ignored, and States are being told they have no jusidiction in the invasion. Just as the North in the Civil War had businesses that couldn't compete with slave labor used in the South, we now have businesses in the U.S. that rely on cheap illegal labor to compete with foreign products.