Which of the following describes a major difference between the first and second waves of European imperialism

2 answers:

8 0

Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, the correct response would be the one having to do with the fact that the second wave was much more focussed on the extraction of resources from places like African and South America, since this was turning the "scramble for Africa".

Vladimir [108]3 years ago

8 0

Only the second wave was motivated by a need for natural resources for industrialization.

You might be interested in

William Pitt was the organizer of British victory in the Seven Years' War. relatively sympathetic to American protests during th

Wewaii [24]

Answer:

True

Explanation:

William Pitt, a British State Secretary at the time of the war between France and India and afterwards filled in as Great Britain's Prime Minister.
He gave liberal subsidizing to Prussia, Britain's partner in the Seven Years' War, for soldiers to secure French powers in Europe.
The tide changed in the year 1757 in light of the fact that William Pitt, the new British pioneer, considered the to be clashes as the way to building a tremendous British realm.
Obtaining vigorously to back the war, he paid Prussia to battle in Europe and repaid the settlements for bringing troops up in North America.

6 0

4 years ago

How did the hispanos of new mexico get along with the anglos who began to settle in the area?

Roman55 [17]

D. Not very well because the Anglos looked down on hispanos. APEX

3 0

4 years ago

Read 2 more answers

1. Why is the Manhattan Project important?

garri49 [273]

The Manhattan Project was the US government program during World War II that developed and built these first atomic bombs. Detonation of these first nuclear bombs signaled arrival of a frightening new Atomic Age.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Who has the power to provide health care services and other assistance to the people?

EleoNora [17]

Wrapped cat in burrito

4 0

2 years ago

What was Stalin's part in ww2

Ad libitum [116K]

Stalin's role in World War II was instrumental in the victory of humanity over Nazism. Slandered by his internal opponents and bourgeois ideologists after his death in 1953, his military merits are rarely given the prominence they deserve, while battles and smaller leaders are given more prominence than the Soviet steel leader.

“In the direction of armed struggle, Stalin was generally helped by his natural intelligence and wealth of intuition. He knew how to discover the main element of a strategic situation and, as a result, he knew how to respond to the enemy, to unleash this or that important offensive operation.

"There is no doubt: he was worthy of the supreme command."

7 0

3 years ago