World War I (1914–18): Causes Although the United States<span> did not enter World War I until 1917, the outbreak of that war in 1914, and its underlying causes and consequences, deeply and immediately affected America's position both at home and abroad. In the debate on </span>neutrality<span> and later on peace aims, much was made of European secret diplomacy, which was rejected on the U.S. side of the Atlantic, of militarism and the escalating arms race before 1914, and of the impact of colonialism. Undoubtedly, all these factors contributed to the origins of the European catastrophe, but they do not explain why the war broke out when it did. This question can only be answered more precisely by looking at the political and military decision‐making processes in the last months, weeks, and days of peace in 1914.</span>
Answer:
In 1865 President Andrew Johnson actualized an arrangement of Reconstruction that gave the white South a free submit managing the change from subjection to opportunity and offered no job to blacks in the governmental issues of the South. The lead of the administrations he set up turned numerous Northerners against the president's arrangements. The end of the Civil War found the country without a settled Reconstruction approach. In May 1865, President Andrew Johnson offered an exculpate to every single white Southerner aside from Confederate pioneers and rich grower (albeit the greater part of these later gotten individual acquits), and approved them to make new governments.
Black people were denied any job all the while. Johnson additionally requested almost all the land in the hands of the administration came back to its prewar proprietors - dashing dark seeks after monetary self-sufficiency. At the start, most Northerners trusted Johnson's arrangement merited an opportunity to succeed. The course pursued by Southern state governments under Presidential Reconstruction, in any case, turned a large portion of the North against Johnson's strategy. Individuals from the old Southern first class, including numerous who had served in the Confederate government and armed force, came back to control. The new assemblies passed the Black Codes, extremely restricting the previous slaves' lawful rights and monetary choices in order to compel them to come back to the estates as needy workers. A few states constrained the occupations open to blacks. None enabled any blacks to cast a ballot or gave open assets to their instruction.
Johnson reasoning is exposed before as how important the new laws were to white leaders, and most radicals were against this. The main supporting argument is that Radicals of Lincoln's GOP wished severe reconstruction. They aforesaid the South was a defeated enemy. They demanded sturdy social control for all southerners WHO took half within the rebellion. These radicals had disliked Lincoln's plans for reconstruction. They felt he was too weak. Now, they hoped Johnson would share their concepts. They urged him to decide a session of Congress to pass robust legislation against the South. The radicals had reason to believe the new president united with them. He had known as the rebels traitors. He had demanded sturdy action against them once the war terminated.
Yet, Andrew Johnson shocked the radicals. He didn't call the exceptional session of Congress. Rather, he declared his own program for the southern states. Johnson pronounced an exculpate for every single previous confederate who guaranteed to help the Union and obey laws against bondage. At that point, he allowed previous authorities of the alliance to keep running for office in their states' new races. A considerable lot of these previous revolutionaries were chosen.
The radicals additionally stressed over what might happen to as of late liberated slaves. They said the new state administrations of the South would not regard blacks as free and equivalent nationals. As confirmation, they indicated new laws the southern assemblies passed. The extreme Republicans chose that President Johnson's recreation program must be halted. They started attempting to gain the power of Congress to pass their own program. Just by increasing political power would they be able to rebuff the South and assurance full political rights to previous slaves. So that, the radicals endeavored to take control in two different ways. To start with, they declined to let a large number of them as of late chosen southern congressmen sit down when Congress opened. At that point, they framed their very own joint board of trustees on reproduction. This panel - not the Senate or the House of Representatives - would settle on a significant number of the choices about recreation.
Italy had a monarchy in the 1800s
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although you did not attach any context to the above-mentioned quotation or further references, we are going to assume that you are referring to Solidarity, the social moment in Poland that turned into a worker union that opposed the Communist government.
I have to say that a don't agree with the statement ‘Solidarity died as quickly as it started, having achieved nothing."
I consider that the Solidarity movement in Poland accomplished many things. Indeed, the strike of August 14, 1980, changed the political scenario in Eastern Europe.
The leader of the movement was Lech Walesa. Years later he won the presidential election of Poland. His victory and Vacláv Havel’s victory to become President of Czechoslovakia signified the transformation of Eastern Europe from dominance by the Soviet Union to new democracies.
So what started as a union movement in Communist time in Poland, ended up being a political party that got to power when Lech Walesa became the President of Poland in December 1990.