“offset by economic benefits to the larger industries of the South” There were no larger industries in the South except agriculture. It that arena, the South a rock solid economic ground, it was a world competitor. Move outside of agriculture, and the South was 30 years behind the British and French and 20 years behind the North in capacity and capability. Remove the protective tariffs, what advantage could Southern manufacturing employ to be competitive. Shipping would become almost exclusively British. The Brits and the French would flood the South with there products manufactured cheaper than anything the South could accomplish. And the Southern Constitution forbade the Government from interfering.
The South would remain an agricultural powerhouse for decades, but its ability to diversify into manufacturing would be problematic.
This is my opinion, just as your opinion is the opposite. Since the Confederacy did not survive, our opinions of what might have been are purely speculative in nature. Rhetorical exercises at best.
For the sake of discussion let us say this is "true." Even if it is true, it is irrelevant to the economic damage this would cause to powerful men in the North, and the New York economy specifically.
The point here isn't whether the South was making a mistake in becoming independent, the point is that the South becoming independent was a strong economic incentive to the powerful people in the North to stop them.
The power men of the North regarded the South's efforts to become independent as a serious economic threat to their own industries.
Thus, war. Not to stop human suffering, but to prevent an economic threat to wealthy and powerful people who's descendents are still running the United States of America today.
We know of them as the "Establishment" and "Crony Capitalist" "influence buyers." They own the media. They own Washington DC, and have since the 1850s.