An example of northern hypocrisy, not unlike our buying cheap chinese goods, but slavery was the main reason for the war.
Not exactly, it's much more complicated than that, and it's not simply semantics. The North did not go to war because of slavery, the South did. There is plenty of evidence that Lincoln was willing to compromise, but the hothead secessionists wouldn't have it. It's no different than the no compromise Tea Partiests. Lincoln would have been just as happy to round up all the Black Americans, as most were by that time (the importation of slaves was outlawed in 1807,) and have Henry Clay's ACS ship them to Liberia. James C. Calhoun did say that the issue that would eventually drive the South into succession, and the nation into war would be slavery (in the 20s), but it was the fact that the federal government wanted to dictate what was property and what was not; that property being slaves. It was an issue that was recognized 78 years earlier at the ratification of the Constitution.
It must have sucked to have been Wilber McLean, at any rate.
“I am exceedingly distressed at the proceedings of the Convention—being ... almost sure, they will ... lay the foundation of a Civil War.”
— Elbridge Gerry
No matter which side one is, they should understand the importance of the monuments, and if nothing else, recognize it for the history that it is, and the testament to how far we've come. When people start talking about those that want to efface history, I think of the most violent and brutal leaders’ and revolutionaries history has ever seen, and of all the knowledge lost.