You have made a large amount of unqualified assertions and ad hominem attacks on American culture, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to delve into them in depth. This statement above, however, is just flat out FALSE. On many different levels: 1. You should be aware that the U.S. Constitution, written in 1787 and ratified by the states in 1789, also allowed for the abolition of the foreign slave trade, effective January 1, 1808. By contrast, the UK only passed the Slave Trade Act in 1807, a full 20 years after the U.S. committed itself to the abolition of foreign slave-trading. 2. The Confederacy was not, by any conceivable applicable criteria, richer in any way than the North (U.S.). Not in land, not in population, not in industry, not in infrastructure, not in technology, not in foreign reserves. The very fact that the war even went on for 4 years can largely be attributed to: A) early U.S. incompetence, and B) superior (on average) Confederate military leadership. If the U.S. had truly gotten serious about winning the war in 1861, it would've been over within a year. 3. Finally, not only did the UK (and to a lesser extent, France) not hinder the Confederate war effort - they actually supported the South. Other than bombarding forts and blockading harbors, most action that the U.S. Navy saw during the Civil War consisted in trying to track down and intercept Confederate trading ships that were running cotton to the mills of Manchester and Leeds. Not to mention the fact that Lincoln had to do some serious diplomacy to prevent UK intervention (see The Trent Affair) on behalf of the Confederacy. The South's basic war strategy planned on holding out long enough against the North to warrant de jure recogntion of the CSA's independence by the European powers, especially the UK and France.