Strong circumstantial evidence supporting piracy as a cause of the Civil War.

[Solvedit]

You don't have a "Who" (which pirates?  Speaking what language? How many?).

Doesn't matter at all.  Why do we have to know exactly who they were?

Are you saying there weren't any pirates?  You've already said there were in New York.  Why do we have to know exactly who they were to suspect continued operations in secret may have offended Europe?  

You don't have a "How" (how did their actions cause the states to reject federal authority over states in certain legal matters/allowing new states to have slavery/rise of the Republican party (who opposed slavery), or how pirates convinced everyone to have slaves, or how pirates forced the Missouri Compromise in Congress, or any of the minor but important social and legal issues that led up to the Civil War.

Of course I did.  I suggested it's possible they got the people who did all those things you mention to overestimate their chances of French and British help, because the former pirates thought they had hidden their tracks if they committed human trafficking against French and British educated people in the Caribbean.

It's also possible the plantation owning class wanted to cut down the numbers of people who had moved in to the Indian Reserve of the Proclamation Line, which is not in Ohio, before anyone was allowed to move there.  The plantation owners, as well as wealthy Europeans, may have purchased land there, then found it unusable because it was populated by bands of heavily armed people who had moved in before they were allowed.  Why did the natives starve on the Trail of Tears?  Couldn't they simply catch and dry out a little more game or set aside some more crops?  What was so pressuring them that they were unable to bring enough food to withstand a trip of a few weeks? 

 You haven't provided a "When" -- your suggested (lot of "what ifs" and "suppose" in your document) timeline is all over the place.  There's no "Where" (where did they start this and where were they active?) or "Why" (why on earth would they do this?)

Why is it so important?  As various pressures wore down the Indians, like the smallpox blankets and the Creek civil war, more and more moved in gradually.  There was probably pressure from better ships and naval guns, increasing European presence and naval patrols in the Caribbean, and increasing land pressure on Caribbean islands and perhaps the South or Central American mainland.

When pressed for details you often skip to "Perhaps when the Caribbean" or "the average private may merely have hoped for the leaders of their society to be drawn from their own ethnicity..."

Are you denying the South can be a little bit about favoring people with antebellum ancestry? 

That's like saying "Perhaps when the Caribbean was warmer, Chupacabras migrated away from the hot weather.  They may have built canoes so that they could travel across the Gulf of Mexico.  Can it be when they arrived here they found hunting lost humans was a safe way to exist?"  To have this taken seriously, I have to have something that shows conclusively that Chupacabras existed, that they migrate away from warm weather.   Then prove that they built boats that could have traveled long distances.

But there are no chupacabras.  There definitely were pirates and they probably went somewhere especially the ones which took to foraging and smoking bush meat because they probably already knew a few things about how to survive in the wild.

Tossing in mention of one Confederate private who neglected to mention that his family was extremely wealthy (hence the interest in Cavaliers since he wasn't part of the officer corps) and owned upwards of a hundred slaves and who forgot to mention slaves in his own service unit doesn't help your idea of pirates doing anything to cause the Civil War ... particularly since he wrote his memoir about the war and not things leading up to it... like the Dred Scott decision.

To reiterate, he claimed their cause was to preserve what he falsely called the freedom of Cavalier society which may be the freedom to take Ottoman-style administrative slaves, which may suggest human trafficking, which may have offended France and England and led them to encourage the South, then offer too little support for them to win. 

So how about a clear statement of what/who/how/when/where/why -- without any suppose/if/consider/may have hoped/can it be/ statements.

You might be a little mixed up about what we're doing here.  Do people come to a discussion forum prepared to do a thesis defense?  Even though other parts of the forum discuss aliens and cryptids and government conspiracies? 

Are you sure you didn't crib your position from sitting in on a session where someone wanted research funding and had to state a testable hypothesis in order to get the funding?  It's as if you're doggedly trying to apply a pattern that doesn't fit.