1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Inessa [10]
3 years ago
7

Name 3 things that the Abbasid Empire is known for.

History
1 answer:
worty [1.4K]3 years ago
4 0
1.Their advancements in mathematics and sciences
2. The Caliphate
3. Respect for cultural heritage of conquered peoples led to translation of Greek texts and the preservation of Classical and Hellenistic knowledge
You might be interested in
Under the articles of confederation, how did the national congress work?
pishuonlain [190]
The answer is B, each state had one vote, regardless of their size or population.
5 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What caused the United States and the United Nations to form a coalition in the early 1990s? A) Iraq attacked Kuwait. B) The Ber
Natalija [7]

Answer:

A) Iraq attacked Kuwait.

Explanation:

Right on EG2020

4 0
3 years ago
In the myth of the "Self-Made Man", what did business tycoons claim their success was simply the result of? What was the actual
True [87]

Answer:

The Self-Made Myth exposes the false claim that business success is the result of heroic individual effort with little or no outside help. Brian Miller and Mike Lapham bust the myth and present profiles of business leaders who recognize the public investments and supports that made their success possible—including Warren Buffett, Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry’s, New Belgium Brewing CEO Kim Jordan, and others. The book also thoroughly demolishes the claims of supposedly self-made individuals such as Donald Trump and Ross Perot. How we view the creation of wealth and individual success is critical because it shapes our choices on taxes, regulation, public investments in schools and infrastructure, CEO pay, and more. It takes a village to raise a business—it’s time to recognize that fact.

This book challenges a central myth that underlies today’s antigovernment rhetoric: that an individual’s success is the result of gumption and hard work alone. Miller and Lapham clearly show that personal success is closely tied to the supports society provides.

Explanation:

it’s worth mentioning briefly an additional impact that the self-made myth has on our public debates—that of people voting their aspirations. Because the rags-to-riches myth persists, many Americans hold on to the belief, however unlikely, that they too may one day become wealthy. This has at times led to people’s voting their aspirations rather than their reality. As Michael Moore noted in 2003:

After fleecing the American public and destroying the American Dream for most working people, how is it that, instead of being drawn and quartered and hung at dawn at the city gates, the rich got a big wet kiss from Congress in the form of a record tax break, and no one says a word? How can that be? I think it’s because we’re still addicted to the Horatio Alger fantasy drug. Despite all the damage and all the evidence to the contrary, the average American still wants to hang on to this belief that maybe, just maybe, he or she (mostly he) just might make it big after all.35

It is essential that we find a more honest and complete narrative of wealth creation. In chapter 2, we expose the fallacy of the self-made myth by examining the stories of individuals often lifted up as successes in our public dialogues. In examining their stories, we come to better understand that even their business success includes contributions from society, from government, from other individuals, and even luck.

Beyond the moralizing ridiculed by Twain, this individual success myth overlooked a number of key social and environmental factors. The emergence of a clear geography of opportunity showed that there was something about the place where one lived that contributed to one’s success. No matter what personal qualities someone had, if you lived in Appalachia or the South, your chances of ascending the ladder to great wealth were slim. Those who achieved great wealth were almost invariably from the bustling industrial cities of the Northeast. By one estimate, three out of four millionaires in the nineteenth century were from New England, New York, or Pennsylvania.7

Another unique external factor was the opportunity that existed at that time, thanks to expanding frontiers and seemingly unlimited natural resources. The United States was conquering and expropriating land from native people and distributing it to railroads, White homesteaders, and land barons. Most of the major Gilded Age fortunes were tied to cornering a market and exploiting natural resources such as minerals, oil, and timber. Even P. T. Barnum, the celebrated purveyor of individual success aphorisms, had to admit in Art of Money Getting that “in the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult for persons in good health to make money.”8

He might have added that it also helped to be male, to be free rather than a slave, and to be White. While free Blacks had some rights in the North, they had little opportunity to achieve the rags-to-riches dream because of both informal and legal discrimination. Even after the Civil War, Blacks, Asians, and others were largely excluded from governmental programs like the Homestead Act that distributed an astounding 10 percent of all US lands—270 million acres—to 1.6 million primarily White homesteaders.9

5 0
3 years ago
Now imagine you are the editor of the paper that receives a letter like this. If you print it, you will be arrested, too. Your f
Romashka-Z-Leto [24]
Just tell your friend to not print it out 
4 0
3 years ago
Why didn't Clemenceau get everything he wanted at the Paris peace conference​
dangina [55]

Answer:

I think the answer is "because they did not share the same views" but, if you give me some answer choices I should be able to answer more to your liking.

Explanation:

Different victors wanted different things, so they couldn't ALL have everything they wanted. Britain and France did NOT want a League of Nations, but Wilson insisted on little else. Clemenceau wanted crippling reparations, Wilson and Lloyd George didn't

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Name three situation in which focuses is created
    6·1 answer
  • What role did merchants from Venice, Italy, play in the decline of the Byzantine Empire?
    9·1 answer
  • Which group of voters did purges in Louisiana eliminate, weakening the political power of Governor Earl Long in the 1950s? Afric
    10·2 answers
  • QUICK! LOTS OF POINTS
    7·1 answer
  • What law determines how a person will be reincarnated? This is a question on India. Around the time of the Aryans. Thanks!
    13·1 answer
  • The Amendment to the Constitution protects victims of human trafficking.
    8·2 answers
  • How did drug use in the counterculture movement lead to new laws and a change in government policy?
    7·1 answer
  • 1.Choose a current American corporation from the list and conduct research. Create a chart or write one detailed paragraph expla
    9·1 answer
  • What is an ayatollah?
    13·2 answers
  • Who was the founder of Texas?
    15·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!