<span>The name of the poem became a nominal designation of the mission of the imperialists in the colonial possessions.
Kipling depicts the non-European peoples of them as underdeveloped, dangerous and demanding constant control and assistance from the "white nations". In this regard, the text was often viewed as racist and pro-European-chauvinistic, as a cover for colonial policy, primarily by Britain, justifying its capture in Asia and Africa by humanistic considerations.</span>
True. Although there are many people who believe that governors are irrelevant and that the president more or less decides everything with the congress, it is incorrect and bad governors can make a lot of damage to the state that the federal government has to repair out of tax payers money later.
Answer: One major difference is that King's believes that slavery didn't play a role, while Burns' does. A historical event that could support King's is when Congress established the Freedmen's Bureau in 1865. This provided aid to African Americans in their transition from slavery to freedom. A historical event that could support Burns' is Dred Scott v. Sandford. The case in 1857 declared that slaves and blacks descended from slaves and were not American citizens and cannot sue, so this could have led to outrage and war.
Indentured servants are people who were in england that didn't have the money to pay for the ship ride over to the colonies. So, these people agreed to work for a weathly person (for free) for a set amount of time in exchange for the money to buy the boat ticket.
