Um...there's no explanation of the Confederacy that does not end back in an attempt to justify and perpetuate slavery.
If you look at the common narrative of the "Lost Cause", you get things like -
It was about states rights (to keep people enslaved); It was about the economic life of the noble, chivalric south (because it was built on slave labor); It was a war of Northern aggression (how dare they try to free our slaves!); Slavery was a God given "positive good" promoting the welfare of blacks who were better off as slaves than free in Africa because they are unequipped to be full people yet (because the North and southern abolitionists can't argue against a Divine institution can they? And thus allowing slavery to be perpetuated which we need or all us rich people will all be poor.)
Regarding "losing" history...history is always looked back at and revisited; there is a tendency to view the past with a romantic or mythological eye and then later to re-evaluate it with a more dispassionate one, and that re-evaluation is always a constant. I'm old enough to remember still being taught things like George Washington cut down a cherry tree and admitted it to his father because he couldn't lie. We made mythic men out of the founding fathers, but inevitably historians were going to go back and really look at what happened and find they were just people, complex and messy and inconsistent people.
Here's a few things that I've learned as an adult that was never touched on when I was in high school (cue comments about the poor education in southern states! 😄):
Washington almost bankrupted the army; after being asked to be the 1st President*, he said he'd do it - not for a salary but to cover his expenses. But Washington was a spendthrift and as I mentioned, almost bankrupted the Continental army, so they actually turned down that offer. Eventually Washington relented and accepted the salary.
Abraham Lincoln was the wrestling champion of his county in Illinois. His life narrative when I was a kid involved log cabin building, putting himself through school, his law practice and then the presidency which he won because a girl wrote to him and suggested he grow a beard to hide his face. (Okay only mildly serious there)
President Garfield is often described as being shot by a disgruntled office seeker. Charles J. Guiteau, however, was suffering from mental illness and had never talked with Garfield prior to Garfield winning the presidency. Having a long history of problems (including being kicked out of a free love commune), Guiteau believed that getting a speech published (Garfield vs Han****) and presenting a handful of speeches (some that he couldn't even complete) was sufficient work to earn a position in Grant's cabinet - if not an ambassadorship. He finally met with Grant the first time after he'd taken the Presidency, and not getting his desired governmental appointment plotted and executed an assassination. Modern psychologist think Guiteau may have been a narcissistic schizophrenic. However, for the most part, this narrative was left out, giving the perception that Guiteau was an aggrieved public servant promised a job which Garfield later reneged on.
Georgia wasn't originally a slave state. It was money and influence from the Carolinas that caused the leadership at the time to reverse the decision (and fairly quickly, I think there are only a few weeks between announcing that there wouldn't be slavery and when laws were changed to allow it. Plantation owners in the Carolina wanted to open up the savannah lands (getting rid of the people already there) but only if they could bring their slaves to farm the land).
I do think that eventually historical figures from the civil war and before will be understood as both people who did good and bad things and that some of those things were due to thoughts that to us now seem as abhorrent as, say jus primae noctis**, or as weird as say, using beef bullion enemas to treat a President who'd been shot while prodding his wound with unwashed hands, but weren't in their time. What we're struggling with is demythifying the past at the moment, and accepting what that means about then and how it informs now.
*Even this is a bit of myth, as it implies the US was a leaderless confederation until Washington, ignoring Peyton Randolph as president of the First Continental Congress, John Han**** as president when the Declaration was signed, Samuel Huntington as president when the Articles were ratified and took effect, Thomas McKean as the first president elected under the Articles, and John Hanson as the first president under the Articles to serve the prescribed one-year term
**Yes I know there is debate about how widespread this custom was or if its entirely mythological, but since it was specifically outlawed by King Ferdinand of Aragon in the Arbitral Decision of Guadalupe and combined with historical references to similar practices going back to ancient Greece, I'm erring on the side that it was a thing of some kind in some places or with specific rulers.