Because despite what some apologists try and argue today, the world was generally unconcerned with Southern 'rights' arguments. What they say was the enslavement of millions and the battle between an aristocratic, slave power south in battle against an immigrant friendly, free-man, republican North.
And the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers
I think another crucial ingredient people seem to miss when trying to demonize the Southern States and deify Lincoln and the North was the fact that it was the Southern states that led the charge to end the slave trade long before the Civil War came about. Virginia being the first. The expansion of slavery into new territory would have, or should I say could have only been possible by relocating existing slaves to new territory as the importation of slaves was made outlaw.
This dispersement would have actually been a crucial step toward eventual abolition. Meanwhile it would have eased the conditions of the slaves expotentially. The overpopulation and the burdens of cost to properly feed and house slaves would have been eased allowing for better conditions. The lack of concentration of slave-holders to abolitionists would have also significantly decreased thereby deluting the political power of slave-holders which in turn would have eventully brought about a peaceful resolution and end to the issue of slavery.
Now, as to the true reason of the War of Aggression. When 13 colonies each sovereign and independant joined together in unison vanquishing their overlord's across the pond, they devised a government. A union which promoted the dignity and individualality of their respective sovereign States. They voluntarily joined in Union. They weren't held to do so by gunpoint. They knew that their common interests could best be pursued if indivdually these sovereign and free States united. There is no historical evidence to be had to the contrary of this, the Union wasn't formed and divided into sections and regions. It was individual States who, I'll say again VOLUNTARILY joined together.
If anyone had told them, or if they at any time had the slightest idea that this bond would be permanent and inseperable, they would have never entered into contract.
History shows that the people at the time of our nation's founding understood and viewed the seperate states as independant and sovereign nations unto themselves. Revisionist history from self serving and power mad men have convinced anyone who'd think different to be mistaken.