Answer:
<em>1. How did Western societies change in the postwar era?</em><em> Well, Workers found their own lives changing as industrial America changed. In the postwar period the West and the Southwest continued to grow a trend that would continue through the end of the century. </em>
2. How did governments around the world respond to the Great Depression?<em> </em><em>Well, They Widespread unemployment during the 1930s exacerbated an already difficult situation by forcing the government to spend millions of dollars on various relief programs. But, They were really ineffective. </em><em>3. Why did nations adopt authoritarian governments in the 1930's? </em><em>Well, Pilsudski in Poland was dictator from 1926 till his death.
</em>
<em>Then there was the World Slump, which caused a crisis everywhere. Hitler was just part of a pattern, and came to power legally.</em>
<em>4. How did the Soviet Union change under Joseph Stalin? </em><em>Well, Soviet Union included rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, a totalitarian state, collectivization of agriculture, a cult of personality and subordination of the interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party.</em>
<em>5. How did Hitler's rise to power change Germany? </em><em>Well, Hitler democratic institutions and transformed Germany into a war state intent on conquering Europe for the benefit of the so called Aryan race. His invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, In the </em><em>European</em><em> of the </em><em>World War II. </em>
<em>Good Luck!</em>
The statement "Throughout much of the nineteenth century, Westerners' concept of the universe was based on the ideas of Isaac Newton" is True.Sir Isaac Newton was an English physicist and mathematician. He is most famous for his law of gravity. He was also a key driver in the scientific revolution of the 17th century. Amongst other theories, Newton postulated that the sun kept the planets in orbit by its gravitational pull. He also stated that the moon orbited around the earth.
I think the answer is
C. France is richer and stronger
(2).A.to have more economic opportunities
There are a good number of reasons why the British were able to do so, and in fact rule over India effectively for over a century.
Disunity among Indian princely states. India was more a collection of warring princely states, at loggerheads with each other. The British sucessfully used this to play off one state against another. Add to it there was no dearth of people willing to betray the kingdom for a few pieces of silver. Robert Clive succeeded at Plassey, because Mir Jaffar was willing to betray his master Siraj-Ud-Daulah in lie of being the Nawab. Mir Jaffar himself was betrayed by Mir Qasim later on.Tipu Sultan one of the most redoubtable fighters against the British rule, was finally defeated, as the Marathas, King of Mysore, Nizam of Hyderabad all joined hands with the British.
Superiority over other colonial powers. The other colonial powers in India competing for the share of resources were France,Portugal,Denmark, Holland. Of the 4, Denmark and Holland could never really be serious competitors to the British, they had their own trading posts, scattered around, but were never a serious threat. Portugal focussed primarily on the Western coast, Goa, parts of Kerala, Karnataka, and this left the British with vast swathes of unoccupied territory. That left France as the major contender to Britian in the race for colonialism. The British Army was more well equipped, more professional, more disciplined compared to the French army, suffering from indiscipline and corruption. This made the British win key battles all over the East Coast, as they effectively grabbed control.
Doctrine of Lapse. One of the most effective tactics, the British used to take over most of India. Instead of waging an all out war against some of the princely states, they signed a treaty with them, where in if the ruling king died without a heir, the East India company could take over that. And that is how Satara became one of the first states to end up under British rule. And that was also the main reason for the conflict in Jhansi.
Subsidiary alliance was also an effective instrument. According to this alliance, the kingdom which signs the treaty will have to maintain the following rules:
The British agreed to maintain a permanent and fixed subsidiary force within the territory of their ally.
In return, they didn't take money but took over a part of the territory of the ally.
A British officer called "resident" was placed at the court of the ruler.{he could interfere in the internal matters of the kingdom}
The ally could not maintain any relation with any other ruler without the approval of the British.{so,when the rulers wanted to revolt against the British they are alone.}
The Indian rulers felt a false sense of security but in reality they were losing their independence. On the other hand the Britishers maintained large forces at the expenses of the Indian rulers and also increase their area of influence. Some states brought under control through this policy are Hyderabad, Tanjore, Awadh, etc.
At the end of it all, the British had the advantage of better manpower, were militarily more powerful and stronger, and add to it they had some very canny strategists too. And the disunity among Indian princely states, their constant warring with each other, just added to the advantage.
