I feel it’s also important to note that the majority reason the north wanted to end slavery was not out of humanitarian reasons, although that was a factor. It was an economic conflict between the northern and southern economies essentially. The north couldn’t really compete with the south when the north has to pay wages and the south doesn’t. This point of time is very deep and very wide. Lots to read and lots to study.

It's fascinating to me so I'll add it to my list of things to look into. Thanks for including it in your comments.

I ended up finding this article about the fate of African Americans after the Yorktown Treaty. Interesting stuff.

Most historians who cover Yorktown are content to celebrate Washington’s military genius. The blinders imposed by the lingering effects of American exceptionalism deter them from grappling with issues that would complicate the traditional triumphalist narrative. A clear-eyed look at the sources—including those recorded by British and German participants—reveals that for the 200,000 African Americans who composed 40 percent of the Old Dominion’s population, freedom wore a red coat, not blue, in 1781.

In the leadup to the War of Independence, prominent white colonists feared that British authorities would liberate their enslaved persons in retaliation for rebellion. The African American population certainly hoped that would be the case. After conversing with two Blacks in service to a Pennsylvania family fleeing the Redcoats’ advance on Philadelphia, Rev. Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, a Lutheran minister, confided to his diary on September 20, 1777: “They secretly wished that the British army might win, for then all Negro slaves will gain their freedom. It is said that this sentiment is almost universal among the Negroes in America.”

Name more iconic duo than Americans and seceding to keep slavery. It happened thrice.

Same. I like to rationalize it as them thinking about their (class) problems in very selfish and largely un-critical ways, then conversing with other like minded individuals who share selfish (class) interests, then they write those ideas down and that becomes what is taught to all. Since they hold an overwhelming monopoly on power those ideas remain largely unchallenged as they go on to shape history. They make sense from their point of view to me, because it’s exactly their point of view, without any consideration for the possibility of my point of view. It’s the various interpretations and justifications after the fact that filter their way through the generations. It really makes the idea that we have an unchanging constitution extra terrifying.

It’s our point of view and our expectations that their words mean “liberty and freedom for all,” but their point of view meant exactly what was on the tin “liberty and freedom for all (of my class)”