I am sure someone can clarify, but I read that the Mexicans under Santa Anna had ended slavery and that the Texans wanted to keep their slaves and that was the crux of the division.
This was apparently why the rest of the States did not help Texas as Texas coming into the Union would have tipped the balancein favour of slave states.
If this is true the the Alamo was less a fight against tyranny and a defense of salvery.
Slavery was A reason, but not THE reason. Much of the problem was that for the first several years that the Mexican government allowed Americans to settle in Texas, they were lax about enforcing their laws (including the slavery ban)They just looked the other way about Americans not joining the Catholic Church, and 90 year servitude contracts were legal. But even in 1828- 1832 the Mexicans were nervous about American expansionism and cracked down on the American colonists. The latter felt double crossed that the Mexicans suddenly decided to remind them that they were now Mexican, not American, citizens. Plus, illegal immigration from the U.S to Mexico was a thing at this point. Plus Mexico was wracked by incessant revolts and would be for a long time. Plus Texas was part of the Mexican state of Coahuila y Tejas, and some of the settlers thought that Texas could be better run as a separate state. AND, you had certain types wanting Texas to break away and be a nation separate from the U.S AND Mexico. And you had a movement wanting Texas to join the United States (egged on by Andrew Jackson)...and yes, many of those types in that movement and the independent Republic movement were slave owners. But given the political and cultural differences between Mexicans and Americans (some race based), and Mexico's lack of political stability, a clash between the settlers (and many were also from the British Isles and Germany, among other places), some kind of revolt was inevitable.
share