Answer:
The Civil War was a complex event that was the result of various social, economic, and political factors that had been brewing for decades. The two sides of the argument for whether the Civil War was avoidable or not are as follows:
For: The Civil War was avoidable, and it was the result of a failure of political leadership. Many historians argue that if the political leaders of the time had been able to find a peaceful solution to the slavery issue, then the Civil War could have been avoided. They argue that the North and South could have reached a compromise that would have allowed slavery to exist in the South while also preventing its spread to the North. However, the political leaders of the time were unable to find a solution, which ultimately led to the Civil War.
Against: The Civil War was not avoidable, and it was the result of irreconcilable differences between the North and South. Many historians argue that the North and South had fundamentally different views on slavery and states' rights that could not be reconciled. They argue that the Civil War was inevitable because the two sides were simply too different and could not coexist peacefully. Furthermore, they argue that the economic and social systems of the North and South were so different that they were destined to clash at some point.
In conclusion, while there are arguments for both sides of the debate, it is clear that the Civil War was a complex event that was the result of various social, economic, and political factors that had been brewing for decades.