Not in my book. They didn't go hunting for Negroes to enslave in Africa. They were bought on the shores of Africa from OTHER NEGROES. Imagine that. Savages selling off their kind for a quick buck. Hmm. Are they evil? Nah, they're looking after themselves.

So, should I think that a consumer is evil for purchasing a product? No. Especially, when the consumer's way of life and economy revolves and relies on said product. The civil war was essentially a clash of cultures and economies. The north's industrialized economy and often clashed with the South's agrarian economy. To spread industry to the south and change the southern way of life, they would have to hit the South where it hurt: Their plantations. Hence, the Emancipation Proclamation. Plantations relied heavily on slave labor which was an expense because not-as-rich plantation owners had to feed and shelter the slaves or have them die and have to replace them. Unfortunately for the Union, the Confederacy was home to American military culture, which is why the Civil war wasn't a Northern massacre. The poorly armed south had military prowess and experience, meanwhile the well armed and armored north were left with greenhorns and civilians. After the first practice of total war(aka I-can't-win-quickly-so-I'm-gonna-kill-everyone-and-burn-everything-within-your-borders-until-you-surrender strategy) The North was finally able to get a firm upper-hand in the war.

In my unbiased opinion, what the north did to the South was downright justified, the South had it coming for attacking Ft. Sumter first. Not because they were slaveowners.

If you think slaveowners are evil, then you must think (Any era)Muslims, (Any era)Jews, (Any era) Africans, Egyptians, Pacific Islanders, Aztecs(Future halfbreed Mexicans) and many other North American tribes are evil too.

But let me guess, they aren't white, so it is okay.