Final answer:
Debates on the Civil War's causation acknowledge slavery as a central issue while also recognizing economic, cultural, and governance differences between the North and South. The secession following Lincoln's 1860 election and the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter were key events escalating to war. The war's aftermath led to major reforms shaping American political, economic, and social landscapes.
Step-by-step explanation:
The argument that the Civil War was fought over issues other than slavery arises from the complex historical contexts of the era. Some people argue that economic differences, control over cultural norms, and the struggle between local versus centralized governance played significant roles in causing the war. Historian James McPherson, for instance, highlighted that while soldiers fought for cause and comrades, the underlying reasons for the war were deeply ingrained in the nation's divisive issues such as slavery, economic disparities, and differing cultures. While slavery was central to the southern economy and emerged as a dominant factor, discussions about whether the war was avoidable often reflect on actions such as the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Abraham Lincoln's election, which further polarized the nation on these contentious issues.
Southern secession, sparked by Lincoln's election in 1860, led to the succession of states and the formation of the Confederate States of America. The ultimate decision for war came after both the North and the South resolved to fight for their causes, leading to the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter. The historian's debate on whether the Civil War was avoidable involves considering if there were any points where compromises on slavery or political solutions could have averted war. Economic, social, and political changes following the Civil War reshaped the United States, emphasizing just how significantly the conflict altered American life.