Answer:
People who recognized this economic change and wanted to make money by selling land poured into Florida.
Explanation:
These people, known as land speculators, bought land at cheap prices and sold it at a large profit. During this boom, however, most people who bought and sold land in Florida had never even set foot in the state.
Hey bud
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/british-capture-and-burn-washington
read that it will help u
Answer:
Conflict Theorists.
Explanation:
This statement states that a powerful group of elites created the institution of the state to maintain a status quo that exists to benefit themselves. As this is done by the use of power, both financial and political, it ignores the wishes of those who do not wield any power or influence, and the thought process behind this is stemming from an ideology which exists to fight for limited resources, this is synonymous with how Marx described the Conflict theory.
I believe the answer is: A social movement.
A social movement refers to a form of organized effort that aimed to address a specific social or political issues.
In general, these movement usually an effort to alleviate the suffering from a suppressed group that receive unfair treatment from the majorities.
This question is missing the options. I've found the complete question online. It is as follows:
Although the leaders of two enemy nations admit to a buildup of their own military forces, each sees the other country's actions as unreasonable and motivated by evil intentions. This situation best illustrates:
the mere exposure effect.
the just-world phenomenon.
mirror-image perceptions.
deindividuation.
social facilitation.
None of the listed answers are correct
Answer:
This situation best illustrates mirror-image perceptions.
Explanation:
The term mirror-image perception refers to the human tendency of viewing others as the enemy, as evil, especially in a situation of conflict. It is called mirror-image because both people or sides involved in the conflict see themselves as good, and the other as the villain. That is precisely the case described in the passage. Both leaders do not see a problem concerning their own buildup of their military forces - they "know" they are doing it for good reasons. But both of them also think that the other leader doing it is a sign of evil intentions on his part.
