If you feel that "our disagreement comes more from different views on human nature", then you haven't been paying attention. You have been portraying the Confederate soldiers and generals as superior in skill and determination to their Union counterparts. You have at least strongly implied that oligarchy is superior to democracy. You have repeatedly claimed the the Confederates would succeed at things that they failed at in actual history, apparently for no other reason than that they are Confederates.
You have claimed that the Union would have "
more incompetent generals if the military is plagued by cronyism and nepotism", while ignoring that the Confederacy had at least as many incompetent generals and was at least as prone to cronyism and nepotism. You have claimed that "
A uneducated soldier is likely more fanatical." without providing any evidence that this is true or showing that being fanatical makes for better soldiers. You have claimed that "
The grunts in the CSA might not be book smarts or even literate but they are probably much more harden and fanatical(especially going into the 1900s) then many other people", that the war lasted as long as it did "
because many southern generals spent much more of their life towards the military", and that Confederate citizens were "
better at using weapons" than their Union counterparts. Actual history shows that Confederate soldiers and generals were not superior to Union soldiers and generals.
You have claimed that the Confederacy could keep up with the US on industrialization because "
they can just copy the north". Industrial espionage does not provide investment capital, infrastructure, machinery, or skilled workers. You have claimed that "
CSA expansion could be mostly done by fillbustering". In actual history filibustering always failed. You have claimed that the Confederacy could support "
10 percent of white southerners are a full time paramilitary type force" and that the Union would ignore it. Again, you assume the Union is composed entirely of stupid, incompetent people while ignoring that a standing army of 550 million would bankrupt the Confederacy and cripple their economy.
You have claimed that Southerners were teaching their children "
to be modern knights", Confederate "
white elites and their kids will be petty barons who often study warfare and use poor white masses as their own personal armies," and that "
The elites in the south are living the life of luxury but they also idolize glory and war. All their free time will be focused on that." Actual history shows that all of these are incorrect.
You have claimed "
the north will just consider the south lost but not an actual threat to their states." This would require the US ignoring the repeated Confederate attempts to invade the Union. Real people aren't that stupid. You have claimed that "
New England and the mid Atlantic states will .... be against expansion of the army." You have provided zero evidence to back this claim. You have claimed that "
The north will think it is unable to invade the south but they probably think the south can’t invade them either. Your average northerner would likely not think of the CSA is a threat until they do something like taking DC or march deep into their lands." The Confederacy did all of those things in actual history. You have claimed that "
The north benefited greatly from" Reconstruction. Actual history shows the South benefited greatly from Northern investment capital, expansion and standardization of infrastructure, and investment in public schools for freedmen and poor southern whites.
You have attempted to portray oligarchies as superior to democracies because "
In a democracy you have a lot of dumb people voting." Actual history shows a lot of oligarchs are dumb people, too. You have said "
I think their is a argument for less develop nations being able to advance much more quickly under a undemocratic system." and that the Confederacy "
not having to deal with democracy" would help them. You have claimed that "
undemocratic regimes sometimes come up with clever ways at reforming and modernizing their system. They can get away with more radical reforms if people aren’t voting on it." Actual history shows that democracies are better at economic development than oligarchies. You have claimed that "
Democracies often do poorly at dealing with undemocratic regimes when they become a threat to international scene." Actual history shows that Germany, Italy, and Japan lost World war II.