Final answer:
Southern secession might have been inevitable due to the fundamental ideological differences regarding slavery, economic disparities, and state rights. The South's reliance on slavery, coupled with escalating tensions like Lincoln's election and the attack on Fort Sumter, indicated that peaceful resolution was unlikely.
Step-by-step explanation:
Secession might not have been avoidable due to deep ideological divides on slavery, state rights, and economic differences. The South's commitment to slavery as an institution essential to its way of life made compromise difficult. Events like Lincoln's election and the firing at Fort Sumter pushed the conflict past the point of peaceful resolution. Moreover, secessionists like Jefferson Davis argued for states' rights and the protection of slavery as aligned with the ideals fought for in the Revolution, seeing the federal government's opposition as an infringement.
The state's rights debate and the economic and cultural reliance on slavery catalyzed Southern secession. Southern economies were deeply intertwined with slave labor, while Northern economies were more industrial and less reliant on such labor. This cultural and economic gap widened over time, with compromises such as the Kansas-Nebraska Act only temporarily stemming the tide. The South's perception of threat to their way of life and their state's rights under a Lincoln presidency drove their secession.