Still, you ask Why was the North so intent on ending slavery...? as if your idea that the intent was foremost a profit motive was the driving factor. History shows other factors dating much further back in time as the impetus for the Civil War.
Can you point to incidents in history to back up your supposition? What northern "Power interests" that encouraged the Civil War actually profited during Reconstruction by the acquisition of southern properties? Can you suggest a few to back up your assertion, or are you asking a question and rejecting negative answers out of ignorance?
Please enlighten me as to the power interests that you have in mind as the secret illuminati behind the Civil War?
Was it the rail barons, who already had mature lines into the south but were focused on expanding west?
Was it the shipping lines, who were more focused on European commerce?
Was it the coal companies? What about oil companies?
Or maybe it was the textile companies? Big Agriculture?
Who can you find in history that had the power to manipulate the United States into war with itself in order to profit from it?
JP Morgan? He was only 24 years old when the Civil War broke out and was just learning the banking business.
Cornelius Vanderbilt? He donated his largest steamship to the northern war effort after first being rejected. He received a Congressional Gold Medal for his support. Post-war, Vanderbilt focused on the New York railways and built Grand Central Station.
John D. Rockefeller? He was 22 at the start of the Civil War and in the produce business. He did make a lot of money selling food to the Union Army, but post-war he moved onto the oil business.
Andrew Carnagie? He started out as a telegraph operator who was hired by Thomas A. Scott of the Pennsylvania Railroad when he was 18 years old. Scott eventually became Assistant Secretary of War in charge of military transportation during the Civil War and appointed Carnagie to be Superintendent of the Military Railways and the Union Government's telegraph lines in the East when he was 22.
So who did you have in mind?
-PJ
Because in 1860, the motives were different. The North wanted absolute domination of the country. What better way to dominate the country than to put the South out of business and buy up their land?
Weaponization of virtue out of self interest is an old trick. The modern liberal claims to want socialism out of kindness, to mitigate poverty. When in reality, because it results in people working for free to no benefit for themselves, the liberal really wants a slave class.
I can see the power classes of the north weaponizing the slave issue for a short-term loss because, in the long-term, they can own the land of the South. It’s hard for the South to argue against that because they have to argue for slavery which puts them at a disadvantage. The South gives in, because they can’t win. Their costs go up, because they are now paying wages, they lose thwir plantations. Suddenly, the North goes, “Hey, look at all this land for sale cheap!”
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.
High political junkie
Did you see the movie Zoolander? Ben Stiller weaves an interesting story of the textile industry into this outlandish comedy.