No, those are the ACTUAL facts of the Civil War as evidenced by the statements from the participating southern states.
Don't do this, all respect is lost if you deny that the main reason and for some states the ONLY stated reason was to keep slaves becasue this is beyond question.
I am not denying it. I don’t subscribe to Lost Cause revisionism. I came to know the generals of the Civil War, both north and south, as celebrated military commanders, so I tend to approach this conversation from a different perspective.
The state militias of the time and its officers were loyal to their states to an extent that is simply unrelatable today. The notion of state loyalty is foreign to contemporary Americans .
Take James Longstreet for example. He did not support slavery, but felt compelled to support secession due to state loyalty and a belief in state’s rights independent of slavery.
Also, take Sherman for example. He was not an abolitionist nor did he support equality for freed slaves, yet he served with distinction in the Union Army. Some would argue that the Confederacy received leniency, especially its officers, because many Union leaders were somewhat sympathetic to the south.
Finally, had there not been a Civil War, we would be celebrating generals like Lee and Longstreet as heroes of the American campaigns of Manifest Destiny against Mexico and Native American tribes...campaigns with significant white supremacist undertones.
So yes, the Civil War was about slavery, but that is also a simplistic way to frame it.