The Freedmen’s Bureau was founded to help

What are all the impacts of Washingtons farewell address

arlik [135]

The Danger of Factions
The Preservation of the Union.
Religion and Morality
America’s Role in the World

4 0

3 years ago

briefly describe the similarities between the feudal economic structure of medieval europe and medieval japan

Alona [7]

How Japanese Castles are similar to European Castles
1.They had large and tall walls for protection
2. They often had moats around them to discourage the digging of tunnels
3. They had narrow and steep stairways to make assault difficult
4. They had portholes for guns and for arrows
5. They often had a main gate area that could be used as a trap
6. They almost always had concentric rings of walls to give them multiple layers of protection
7.They capitalized on terrain features - often the best placement was at the top of a hill or small mountain. This gave a very advantageous position and view

DIFFERENCES
Unlike European feudalism Japan’s feudalism system did not have a true pyramid form with the monarch presiding over the less important nobles.

First, the authority in Japan was much less centralized than it was in the nation-states of Europe. Even though most of the local aristocrats paid lip service to the emperor, the rugged terrain of Japan made it very difficult for the emperor to fully control the local aristocracy. Therefore the local aristocrats had much more power in Japan than they ever had in France, Britain, or any other European country.

Secondly, even though the lower nobility in Japan (the samurai) swore fealty to their local lords, the local lords didn’t give the samurai any land of their own. When the European nobility receives land in exchange for their military services, the samurai did not join a landowning hierarchy. Instead of that they were given an independent income from their local lord based upon what that lord’s lands produced.

In contrast, European knights usually had their own serfs to work the land the knights received from their lord. While a Japanese samurai might have had servants, these servants did not work the land the way they would have done in Europe.

8 0

3 years ago

Please help me with my question and id k how to do this please help

dem82 [27]

Answer:

“The White Man’s Burden” presents the conquering of non-white races as white people's selfless moral duty. This conquest, according to the poem, is not for personal or national benefit, but rather for the gain of others—specifically, for the gain of the conquered. The white race will “serve [their] captives’ need” rather than their own, and the white conquerors “seek another’s profit, / And work another’s gain.” Even if they do not recognize their benefit, the non-white races will be brought “(Ah, slowly!) toward the light,” escaping the “loved Egyptian night” in which they idled before their conquest. Yet the non-whites’ positive sentiment for their own “darkness” indicates the extreme difficulty whites will face in seeking to educate the conquered peoples.

By emphasizing the hardships of this "burden," the speaker positions himself as a realist who sees all the difficulties of an imperialist project and the inevitable thanklessness that results. The speaker announces that imperial conquest will “bind your sons to exile” and cause them to “wait in heavy harness” in pursuit of the “savage wars of peace,” indications of the difficulty and tedium of the inevitable war. The “silent, sullen peoples” lifted up from “bondage” will never offer the imperialists any thanks or praise.

By taking the difficulty and thanklessness of imperialism seriously, the speaker establishes his credibility as someone of clear-sighted judgement. This stance of realism offers the speaker’s argument two key things. First, it staves off the retort that the speaker is some idealist blinded by an impossible dream. The speaker’s focus on the difficulty of the task actually has the effect of making that task seem, eventually, achievable, since all the difficulties have already been foreseen. Second, it sets up the speaker (and the European powers the speaker seems connected to) as a kind of stern, realist father figure to America who will offer Americans true respect—“the judgement of your peers” both “cold” and “edged with dear-bought wisdom”—if they fulfill their imperialist task.

Indeed, the poem in many ways appeals to the middle-class virtues of ordinary turn of the 20th century Americans by presenting imperialism as a sober, tedious duty rather than a grand adventure of conquest. Imperialism is a “toil of serf and sweeper,” not a “tawdry rule of kings.” The larger part of “the white man’s burden” is thus an exercise in “patience,” accepting the length and difficulty of the task set for the imperialists. Not a calling to a high heroic destiny, but a crude, almost homely task, imperialism suits the desires of those who imagine themselves honest workers on humanity’s behalf, rather than triumphant conquerors of weaker peoples. Put another way, the poem can be seen as cannily playing to the vanity of America precisely by refusing to play to its vanity. The poem is saying to an America that, in 1899, was feeling itself ready to emerge on the world stage: this is how you can stop being a child and grow up.

While the speaker of “The White Man’s Burden” can be seen as trying to cannily build an argument that will specifically appeal to a certain set of Americans, it also seems possible that the speaker is not being purely cynical. The speaker seems to believe everything he is saying: that imperialism and colonialism is a thankless task, taken up by whites purely out of goodwill for other races (even if those other races lack the ability to see the gift being bestowed upon them), without any ulterior motive of profit, reward, praise, or even gratitude. This enterprise may not even succeed; references to the task’s difficulty far outnumber references to its success. Thus even as the speaker believes it is the white man's duty to engage in conquest, he may also believe that this conquest will fall short of its moral goals. Imperialism, the speaker sincerely believes, is the white man’s gracious sacrifice on behalf of non-whites.

Explanation:

all of that^ is basically a theme of colonialism and imperialism, hope it helps:)

3 0

3 years ago

Which event in the late 1680s helped further define the doctrine of classical republicanism?

Elodia [21]

Answer:

1

Explanation:

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

the native americans and settlers had different ways of life. tell me how the native americans used the land and how settlers us

Ostrovityanka [42]

Answer:

During the colonial period, Native Americans had a complicated relationship with European settlers. They resisted the efforts of the Europeans to gain more of their land and control through both warfare and diplomacy. But problems arose for the Native Americans, which held them back from their goal, including new diseases, the slave trade, and the ever-growing European population in North America.

In the 17th century, as European nations scrambled to claim the already occupied land in the “New World,” some leaders formed alliances with Native American nations to fight foreign powers. Some famous alliances were formed during the French and Indian War of 1754–1763. The English allied with the Iroquois Confederacy, while the Algonquian-speaking tribes joined forces with the French and the Spanish. The English won the war, and claimed all of the land east of the Mississippi River. The English-allied Native Americans were given part of that land, which they hoped would end European expansion—but unfortunately only delayed it. Europeans continued to enter the country following the French and Indian War, and they continued their aggression against Native Americans. Another consequence of allying with Europeans was that Native Americans were often fighting neighboring tribes. This caused rifts that kept some Native American tribes from working together to stop European takeover.

Native Americans were also vulnerable during the colonial era because they had never been exposed to European diseases, like smallpox, so they didn’t have any immunity to the disease, as some Europeans did. European settlers brought these new diseases with them when they settled, and the illnesses decimated the Native Americans—by some estimates killing as much as 90 percent of their population. Though many epidemics happened prior to the colonial era in the 1500s, several large epidemics occurred in the 17th and 18th centuries among various Native American populations. With the population sick and decreasing, it became more and more difficult to mount an opposition to European expansion.

Another aspect of the colonial era that made the Native Americans vulnerable was the slave trade. As a result of the wars between the European nations, Native Americans allied with the losing side were often indentured or enslaved. There were even Native Americans shipped out of colonies like South Carolina into slavery in other places, like Canada.

These problems that arose for the Native Americans would only get worse in the 19th century, leading to greater confinement and the extermination of native people. Unfortunately, the colonial era was neither the start nor the end of the long, dark history of treatment of Native Americans by Europeans and their decedent’s throughout in the United States.

Native Americans in Colonial America

Whether through diplomacy, war, or even alliances, Native American efforts to resist European encroachment further into their lands were often unsuccessful in the colonial era. This woodcut shows members of the Cheyenne nation conducting diplomacy with settlers of European descent in the 1800s.

Explanation:

6 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers