a) Identify factors that led to the Russian Revolution (1917).
The October Revolution in Russia in 1917 signified the collapse of Tsarist Russia and the establishment of a regime by the Bolsheviks and the leader of the Communist Party, Lenin. The main reason, among others, was the dissatisfaction of peasants and workers due to large class differences. The dissatisfaction of workers and peasants was preceded by several wars that Russia led and lost all, but the war with Turkey. Peasants barely survived in unreformed economic agricultural conditions. Workers fought for bigger rights in factories, for shortening working hours, but primacy was in waging wars, rather than dealing with economic issues and dissatisfaction of workers and peasants. Also, Emperor Nicholas spent more time dealing with his own family than on state issues. All this led to the general dissatisfaction of the people and the October Revolution.
b) Identify factors that led to the Mexican Revolution (1910–17).
Some of the factors that led to the Mexican Revolution were the dictatorship-like way of ruling that Porfirio Diaz exhibited for over 30 years, the exploitation and poor treatment of laborers, and the large disparity between rich and poor. While there is no definite cause for the Mexican Revolution, there were many factors that led to the decision to rebel against the government.
c) Explain how land-based and maritime empires gave way to new states in the 20th century.
The land-based and maritime empires gave way to new states in the 20th century when the older, land-based empires such as the Ottoman empire, the Russian empire, and the Qing empire collapsed due to a combination of internal and external factors.
Answer:
it should be 40 divided by 4
Explanation:
the tiles arrange into 10 2x2s, so 10 groups of 4
not 4 groups of 10 if it were divided by 10
It freed the slaves that were part of the usa. The confederates would not be affected unless they lost the war.
<h2>
<u>Answer:</u></h2>
<u>In 26th July 1956 Nationalisation ended in Europe. </u>
The argument has often been used to diminish the scale of slavery, reducing it to a crime committed by a few Southern planters, one that did not touch the rest of the United States. Slavery, the argument goes, was an inefficient system, and the labor of the enslaved was considered less productive than that of a free worker being paid a wage.
This sharp contrast between America’s lofty ideals, on the one hand, and the seemingly permanent second-class status of the Negroes, on the other, put the onus on the nation’s political elite to choose the nobility of their civic creed over the comfort of longstanding social arrangements. Ultimately they did so. Viewed from a historic and cross-national perspective, the legal and political transformation of American race relations since World War II represents a remarkable achievement, powerfully.
According to European colonial officials, the abundant land they had "discovered" in the Americas was useless without sufficient labor to exploit it. Slavery systems of labor exploitation were preferred, but neither European nor Native American sources proved adequate to the task.
Learn more about shaping America here:-brainly.com/question/19552107
#SPJ9
