Do you think that conflict can be justified when a compromise cannot be reached? Why or why not?​

below

Explanation:

While it may produce an agreement, compromise does not always resolve problems that contain underlying interpersonal or organizational conflict. This is because compromise is frequently a "settled" resolution to a problem and not typically the optimal solution sought by either party.

Pikuai answers~

When a compromise cannot be made neither party is in the right nor wrong because it cannot be proven nor decided upon. Now, there's a chance a compromise can be made simply by picking another party of people to give their opinion's on the situation. But, I'm saying this from the perspective they cannot do that.

~I hope this helps! I can give more to support why I say no but this Is the bare min. Have a great day!

abraham lincoln, according to anyone who was connected with agriculture, represented the worst of northern politicians. shortly after lincoln was elected, south carolina seceded from the union. they along with other southern states, retained their anger. in a way, it was their own fault: the democrats were split in the south. some wanted slavery to be extended in other states that were about to join the union and some didn't want it badly enough. lincoln had a solid backing from his party: the republicans were united in not wanting slavery to be expanded.