"No, I have not. We were not discussing the sublject of abolition/emancipation. This does not change the fact that the southern states seceeded over the issue of and in order to preserve the institution of slavery."

I have already agreed (multiple times, now) that the slavery issue was indeed a primary motivation for secession. But this was based upon the misconception that Lincoln's administration would enforce abolition upon the South. As I have argued, there is every reason to believe that slavery would have endured longer if the South had not seceded. Emancipation was an unintended consequence of the war, and (to repeat myself) it was probably the only good thing that resulted from the war. I am sorry that you are unable to grasp my point.

"Ah, the old Straw Horse of "Blacks In The North". Were Black folks treated like crap in the North? Of course they were. How does this mitigate their significantly shittier treatment under the slave system in the south? It is a difference in KIND, not degree."

Nothing I wrote indicates that I believe poor treatment of blacks in the North 'mitigates' slavery in the South.

"Cooper's book is a generalalist overview for popular consumption, dating from 1990 or before. Do look up the free Blacks question in a more reliable source."

I cited Cooper on one point only - the number of free blacks in the South versus the North. You said this was "absolute bullshit" - do you have alternate figures? Here are the numbers cited by Ira Berlin in Slaves Without Masters:

Free slaves in the North (1860): 226,152
Free slaves in the South (1860): 261,918

Peter Kolchin in American Slavery: 1619-1877 gives the same figures.

" . . . and Cooper is at Louisiana State University . . ."

Therefore, he could not possibly be correct on this matter? Good one, Greg.

" . . . try something current dealing specifically with the subject under discussion - authors Leon Litwack, Eric Foner, William Loren Katz, Eugene Genovese, et. al. Do look up the free Blacks question in a more reliable source."

I have read all four. And I'm not sure you really want to be citing Genovese, his views have shifted rather far to the right over the years (see The Southern Front).

Greg, you seem bound and determined to misunderstand and misrepresent nearly everything I say. And this thread had drifted away from the original topic. If you or anyone else has something to add ON THE TOPIC I will respond. Otherwise, good night.