1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ELEN [110]
2 years ago
7

Which state was NOT one of the three states that were readmitted during Reconstruction in 1864?

History
1 answer:
aev [14]2 years ago
3 0

The state which is not readmitted during the reconstruction in 1864 was Tennessee. Thus option (C) is correct.

<h3>How many states were there during reconstruction?</h3>

Reconstruction had total 11 states who were rebel states in the south in order to regain the republic form of the government and also wanted the representation in the congress by obtaining the seats.

There were seven former Confederate states are readmitted to the Union in the summer Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

Tennessee was the only state to opt out of the 1864 reconstruction. So, choice (C) is the right OPTION.

Learn more about Reconstruction here:

brainly.com/question/8162163

#SPJ1

You might be interested in
What was the “Great Compromise” in drafting the new constitution? a plan to create new states in the Northwest a plan to create
velikii [3]
Base on the question that ask to choose among the following choices that states the Great Compromise in drafting the new constitution and base on my research and further investigation, the possible answer would be a plan to create a federal judiciary with state nominees. I hope you are satisfied with my answer 
3 0
3 years ago
Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

5 0
1 year ago
True or False: The Panama Canal was built in the 19th Century.
fiasKO [112]

Answer:

True

Explanation:

The idea of a canal across Central America was revived during the early 19th century.

7 0
3 years ago
Which of the following did President Abraham Lincoln use to establish the abolition of slavery as a Union objective in the civil
Setler79 [48]

Answer:c

Explanation:in 1862, President Abraham Lincoln issues a preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, which sets a date for the freedom of more than 3 million black slaves in the United States and recasts the Civil War as a fight against slavery.

When the Civil War broke out in 1861, shortly after Lincoln’s inauguration as America’s 16th president, he maintained that the war was about restoring the Union and not about slavery. He avoided issuing an anti-slavery proclamation immediately, despite the urgings of abolitionists and radical Republicans, as well as his personal belief that slavery was morally repugnant. Instead, Lincoln chose to move cautiously until he could gain wide support from the public for such a measure.

In July 1862, Lincoln informed his cabinet that he would issue an emancipation proclamation but that it would exempt the so-called border states, which had slaveholders but remained loyal to the Union. His cabinet persuaded him not to make the announcement until after a Union victory. Lincoln’s opportunity came following the Union win at the Battle of Antietam in September 1862. On September 22, the president announced that slaves in areas still in rebellion within 100 days would be free.

On January 1, 1863, Lincoln issued the final Emancipation Proclamation, which declared “that all persons held as slaves” within the rebel states “are, and henceforward shall be free.” The proclamation also called for the recruitment and establishment of black military units among the Union forces. An estimated 180,000 African Americans went on to serve in the army, while another 18,000 served in the navy.

After the Emancipation Proclamation, backing the Confederacy was seen as favoring slavery. It became impossible for anti-slavery nations such as Great Britain and France, who had been friendly to the Confederacy, to get involved on behalf of the South. The proclamation also unified and strengthened Lincoln’s party, the Republicans, helping them stay in power for the next two decades.

The proclamation was a presidential order and not a law passed by Congress, so Lincoln then pushed for an antislavery amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ensure its permanence. With the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865, slavery was eliminated throughout America (although blacks would face another century of struggle before they truly began to gain equal rights).

Lincoln’s handwritten draft of the final Emancipation Proclamation was destroyed in the Chicago Fire of 1871. Today, the original official version of the document is housed in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

3 0
3 years ago
What is the main difference between continuity theories of development and stage theories of development?
Slav-nsk [51]

One of the major controversies in developmental psychology centers if development is continuous or discontinuous. Those psychologists who support the continuous view of development suggest that development involves gradual and ongoing changes throughout the life span, with behavior in the earlier stages of development providing the basis of skills and abilities required for the next stages. Not all psychologists, however, agree that development is a continuous process. Some view development as a discontinuous process. They believe development involves distinct and separate stages with different kinds of behavior occurring in each stage. This suggests that the development of certain abilities in each stage, such as specific emotions or ways of thinking, have a definite starting and ending point. However, there is no exact time at which ability can appear or disappears. Although some types of thinking, feeling or behaving may seem to appear suddenly, it is more than likely that this has been developing gradually for some time. Stage theories of development rest on the assumption that development is a discontinuous process involving distinct stages which are characterized by qualitative differences in behavior. They also assume that the structure of the stages is not variable according to each individual, however the time of each stage may vary individually. Stage theories can be contrasted with continuous theories, which posit that development is an incremental process.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The first species of early humans to travel outside of aftrica was ?
    10·1 answer
  • Why is the President at the top of the Federal Bureaucracy? *
    12·1 answer
  • How did ancient American Indian cultures use Clovis and Folsom points?
    15·1 answer
  • Why did chief John Ross believe that the Confederates would win the war?
    8·1 answer
  • Three famous artists during the renaissance were __?
    14·1 answer
  • Germany wanted to build a railroad through _____. the Balkans France England Russia
    11·1 answer
  • Given what you know about that time period, how do you think the Catholic Church ruled in Galileos case? Why?
    12·2 answers
  • Tom gave up the brush with reluctance in his face, but alacrity in his heart. And while the late steamer Big Missouri worked and
    5·2 answers
  • The United States has two different levels of government: state and federal. What are some examples of their different powers?
    7·1 answer
  • 3.
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!