A similar point between these colonies is how both were based on agriculture that served both food and commerce.
<h3>What were the differences?</h3>
- The colonials of New England focused on the export of wood.
- For this, these colonies had a very efficient transport system.
- The Chesapeake clones focused on tobacco production and export and on perennial crops that provided pasta for food.
Both colonies occupied and expelled indigenous villages, where they had to attack and suffer attacks from the natives due to the occupation of land. This changed the way of life of the natives and forced the creation of relationships between them and the settlers. Among these relationships, the Chesapeake colonies were more friendly, although they had to face some problems.
Learn more about the New England and Chesapeake colonies:
brainly.com/question/28337862
#SPJ1
Hey there!
The ancient Greeks used direct democracy, and we use representative. The difference is that first of all, with a direct democracy, the opinions of the people directly affect the outcome of the decision being made. Those eligible to vote voted in assemblies, and the response of the majority ruled.
Here- it's a bit different. We use representative democracy- meaning that we elect representatives to vote and speak for us on the behalf of the people.
There's our difference right there. A direct democracy - like I said is where decisions directly affect outcomes, as opposed to where representatives are elected on behalf of the people to make laws and represent their voters and territory.
Your answer is C.
Hope this helps!
The Voting Rights act of 1965 declared that no new election laws could be enacted in any state without approval from the Department of Justice. In place of approval it can also be said that without prior clearance from the Department of Justice, it is not possible for any person in the United States of America to hold elections.
<span />
Workers at the Pullman Palace Car Company, a railroad car builder close to Chicago, went on strike on May 11, 1894, in opposition to their meager pay and 16-hour workdays.
<h3>What led to the 1894 Pullman Strike?</h3>
The lack of democracy in Pullman's politics, the firm's strict paternalistic control over its employees, the high cost of gas and water, and the company's unwillingness to let its employees own homes were a few of the factors that led to the strike. The two of them had not yet united.
Debs believed that organizing a nationwide strike would be the only way to push the Pullman Company into arbitration because the government was acting in the General Managers' Association's favor. However, his efforts were unsuccessful. Midway through July, the boycott ended, and the ARU was defeated.
For more information about Pullman Strike refer to the link:
brainly.com/question/7223166
#SPJ4
Do you have the options? If not I'd say European Imperialism was started by Portugal.
