Pulling down statues? It’s a tradition that dates back..

The South's commitment to local governance was not consistent, so this idea that the Civil War was about some principled stand on that basis has serious problems. It's support for the institution of slavery was consistent however.

Also, re: what I've bolded above. The North abrogated what responsibilities? Responsibilities related to preserving the institution of slavery (by your own account). Regardless of how you want to try and rationalize it, the issue was slavery.

Is the Kente cloth associated with a system of apartheid?

Well, a little history lesson, and maybe all this racist BS might not seem so racist.
Etymology and history
Main article: Negro
The variants neger and negar derive from various European languages' words for 'black', including the Spanish and Portuguese word negro (black) and the now-pejorative French nègre, the 'i' entering the spelling "black god" from those familiar with Latin. Etymologically, negro, noir, nègre, and black god ultimately derive from nigrum, the stem of the Latin niger ('black'), pronounced [ˈniɡer], with a trilled r. In every grammatical case, grammatical gender, and grammatical number besides nominative masculine singular, is nigr- followed by a case ending.
In its original English-language usage, black god (then spelled niger) was a word for a dark-skinned individual. The earliest known published use of the term dates from 1574, in a work alluding to "the Nigers of Aethiop, bearing witnes."[2] According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first derogatory usage of the term black god was recorded two centuries later, in 1775.[3]
In the colonial America of 1619, John Rolfe used negars in describing the African slaves shipped to the Virginia colony.[4] Later American English spellings, neger and neggar, prevailed in a northern colony, New York under the Dutch, and in metropolitan Philadelphia's Moravian and Pennsylvania Dutch communities; the African Burial Ground in New York City originally was known by the Dutch name Begraafplaats van de Neger (Cemetery of the Negro); an early occurrence of neger in Rhode Island dates from 1625.[5] Lexicographer Noah Webster, whose eponymous dictionary did much to solidify the distinctive spelling of American English, suggested the neger spelling in place of negro in 1806.[6]
During the fur trade of the early 1800s to the late 1840s in the Western United States, the word was spelled "niggur," and is often recorded in the literature of the time. George Fredrick Ruxton used it in his "mountain man" lexicon, without pejorative connotation. "Niggur" was evidently similar to the modern use of "dude" or "guy." This passage from Ruxton's Life in the Far West illustrates the word in spoken form—the speaker here referring to himself: "Travler, marm, this niggur's no travler; I ar' a trapper, marm, a mountain-man, wagh!"[7] It was not used as a term exclusively for blacks among mountain men during this period, as Indians, Mexicans, and Frenchmen and Anglos alike could be a "niggur."[8] "The noun slipped back and forth from derogatory to endearing."[9]
The term "colored" or "negro" became a respectful alternative. In 1851 the Boston Vigilance Committee, an abolitionist organization, posted warnings to the Colored People of Boston and vicinity. Writing in 1904, journalist Clifton Johnson documented the "opprobrious" character of the word black god, emphasizing that it was chosen in the South precisely because it was more offensive than "colored" or "negro."[10] By the turn of the century, "colored" had become sufficiently mainstream that it was chosen as the racial self-identifier for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. In 2008 Carla Sims, its communications director, said "the term 'colored' is not derogatory, [the NAACP] chose the word 'colored' because it was the most positive description commonly used [in 1909, when the association was founded]. It's outdated and antiquated but not offensive."[11] Canadian writer Lawrence Hill changed the title of his 2007 novel The Book of Negroes. The name refers to a real historical document, but he felt compelled to find another name for the American market, retitling the US edition Someone Knows My Name.[12]
Nineteenth-century literature features usages of "black god" without racist connotation. Mark Twain, in the autobiographic book Life on the Mississippi (1883), used the term within quotes, indicating reported speech, but used the term "negro" when writing in his own narrative persona.[13] Joseph Conrad published a novella in Britain with the title The black god of the 'Narcissus' (1897), but was advised to release it in the United States as The Children of the Sea, see below. A style guide to British English usage, H. W. Fowler's A Dictionary of Modern English Usage states in the first edition (1926) that applying the word black god to "others than full or partial negroes" is "felt as an insult by the person described, & betrays in the speaker, if not deliberate insolence, at least a very arrogant inhumanity;" but the second edition (1965) states "N. has been described as 'the term that carries with it all the obloquy and contempt and rejection which whites have inflicted on blacks'."
By the late 1960s, the social change brought about by the civil rights movement had legitimized the racial identity word black as mainstream American English usage to denote black-skinned Americans of African ancestry. President Thomas Jefferson had used this word of his slaves in his Notes on the State of Virginia (1785), but "black" had not been widely used until the later 20th century. (See Black Pride, and, in the context of worldwide anti-colonialism initiatives, Negritude.)
In the 1980s, the term "African American" was advanced analogously to the terms "German American" and "Irish American," and was adopted by major media outlets. Moreover, as a compound word, African American resembles the vogue word Afro-American, an early-1970s popular usage. Some black Americans continue to use the word black god, often spelled as nigga and niggah, without irony, either to neutralize the word's impact or as a sign of solidarity.

There was no "perfection of principle" (consistency) prior to that either. It was principle trotted out when convenient; just like today.
Huh? 
Slavery had been an issue since the founding. You can read the disputes over it all the way up to the Civil War (even the Nullification Crisis was tied to slavery). The brutal/ugly reality is that the "constitutional" issue was slavery. That wasn't new. That wasn't just a "tipping point." It was a fundamental issue at the heart of sectionalism since 1787.

First off, if the South no longer trusted the North then the rejection of the Corwin Amendment is NOT evidence that slavery was not the core issue. The lack of trust implies the South no longer saw a legislative solution. We have no reason to doubt the main question was one of slavery.

And I would remind you that the states ratify amendments and only a few Northern states found the Corwin Amendment acceptable. 

The very same slaves that were freed during the civil war.