The answer is C. Self-evident. If you read them out loud, you would see that only Self-evident sounds right. Also someone else asked this question xD
*Hope this helps ;D*
Answer:
Raw materials arrived in bigger towns with great frequency, which meant that these towns and cities could grow and develop faster.
Explanation:
The given question is about the text <em>California and Mesopotamia: Similarities and Differences.</em>
The options you were given are the following:
- Raw materials arrived in bigger towns with great frequency, which meant that these towns and cities could grow and develop faster.
- Overland transportation at that time was painfully slow and clunky, via simple wheeled pushcarts, or pack animals such as donkeys and camels.
- The canals provided a built-in transportation system for the Sumerian and Akkadian peoples who first settled the place.
- These rivers had many different branches, tributaries, feeding into them, creating a vast network of streams and canals.
The correct option is the first one as it directly states that water transportation helped towns and cities develop faster, making it crucial for the economical development of Mesopotamia. The rest of the options do not.
The second states why overland transportation wasn't the best, why it made things harder. There is nothing about water transportation.
The third simply states that the canals provided the Sumerian and Akkadian peoples with a transportation system. It doesn't say why that's good, unlike the first one.
The fourth would be the worst option as it doesn't include any information about transportation systems.
McCarthyism is nothing more than a witch hunt. A lot of finger pointing and not a lot of proof. Both parties (Democrat & Republican) in the United States use this in todays world. Ill give examples of both and follow up with how it can be beneficial to each party.
Democrats: Accuse other politicians of being "racist" or "bigoted" just from political ideas and from certain members of the base. While it is not fact or true that Republicans are by policy racist, it is a word that is hated by people and has a negative connotation to it, forcing some to keep distance from said person
Republicans: Accuse other politicians of being "muslin lovers" or "muslins" themselves. We saw this for the entire Obama presidency. Congress and some Republican supporters would use the word "muslin" to describe the president in order to give a negative connotation towards Obama. This has some strong effectiveness due to the recent events (September 11th, 2001).
Both parties are trying to stick a negative idea/precedent/description about the opposition in order to sway votes. This tactic is very effective because not only will you sway votes, theres little repercussion in doing so because the people who disagree with you are not going to be swayed, but that voter in the middle who cares about one issue over the other (in this case racism over fear of muslims or vice versa fear of muslims over racism).
Either someone is intelligent enough to know the rhetoric between the two parties and votes by policy (unaffected / no positive or negative response), they don't care about either issue (unaffected / no positive or negative response), or someone is strongly in favor of one or the other (strong positive or negative response).
While there are some attempts that have been made and can be made that would be so egregious that most people have a negative response, but that rarely happens and would be deemed political suicide.
Hope this helps.
Answer:
A. makes the reader think about the link between tea and Britishness.
Explanation:
I just took the test, and made a 100%. 2020 Edge
