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
Naya [18.7K]
3 years ago
8

: __________ was the home of the industrial revolution and, until the middle of the 19th century, remained the industrial leader

of europe.
History
1 answer:
Serhud [2]3 years ago
8 0
The UK would be the answer
You might be interested in
After World War II the United States occupied Japan and replace it imperial government with
Aloiza [94]

Marxism–Leninism is one of the main communist ideologies. It was the official state ideology of the Soviet Union and other ruling parties of the Eastern Bloc as well as the Communist International after Bolshevisation.[1] The goal of Marxism–Leninism is the transformation of a capitalist state into a one-party socialist state, commonly referred to by Western academics as communist state,[2][3][4][5] to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.[6] This would be achieved by a revolution led by a vanguard party, who would be organized hierarchically and make decisions through democratic centralism.[7][8][9] The state would control the economy and means of production,[10] promote collectivism in society, suppress political dissent[9][10] and pave the way for an eventual communist society which would be both classless and stateless.[7] Marxist–Leninists generally support internationalism and oppose capitalism, fascism, imperialism and liberal democracy. As an ideology, it was developed by Joseph Stalin in the late 1920s based on his understanding and synthesis of both orthodox Marxism and Leninism.[11] Today, Marxism–Leninism is the ideology of Stalinist and Maoist political parties and remains the official ideology of the ruling parties of China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam.[7]

After the death of Vladimir Lenin in 1924, Marxism–Leninism became a distinct philosophical movement in the Soviet Union when Stalin and his supporters gained control of the party. It rejected the common notions among Western Marxists of world revolution, as a prerequisite for building socialism, in favour of the concept of socialism in one country. According to its supporters, the gradual transition from capitalism to socialism was signified by the introduction of the first five-year plan and the 1936 Soviet Constitution. The internationalism of Marxism–Leninism was expressed in supporting revolutions in other countries (e.g. initially through the Communist International or through the concept of socialist-leaning countries after de-Stalinisation). By the late 1920s, Stalin established ideological orthodoxy among the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), the Soviet Union and the Communist International to establish universal Marxist–Leninist praxis.[12][13] In the late 1930s, Stalin's official textbook History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) (1938) popularised the term Marxism–Leninism among communists and non-communists.[14]

Marxism–Leninist philosophy has been criticised by a broad political spectrum both on the left and right. Marxist–Leninist rule has been especially criticised, including by other socialists such as anarchists, communists, democratic socialists, libertarian socialists and Marxists. Marxist–Leninist states have been described as authoritarian, or accused of being totalitarian, for enacting repressions and killings of political dissidents and social classes (so-called "enemies of the people"), religious persecution, ethnic cleansing, forced collectivisation and use of forced labor in concentration camps.[15][8][16] Such states have been accused of genocidal acts in China, Poland and Ukraine.[17][18][19][20] Anti-Stalinist left and other left-wing critics see it as an example of state capitalism[21][22] and have referred to it as a "red fascism" contrary to left-wing politics.[23][24][25] Other leftists, including Marxist–Leninists, have criticised it for its repressive state actions while recognising certain advancements such as egalitarian achievements and modernisation under such states.[26][27] The socio-economic nature of Marxist–Leninist states has also been much debated, varyingly being labelled a form of bureaucratic collectivism, state capitalism, state socialism, or a totally unique mode of production

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
HELP HURRY 40 POINTS!!!
antoniya [11.8K]

Answer:

SAMUEL

Samuel heard from the Lord throughout his life. 1 Samuel 3:4 says, 'Then the Lord called Samuel'. The author of the book of Samuel notes that during these times visions and words directly from God were rare. Though Samuel began to hear from God.

Samuel was called by God. 1 Samuel 3:1-21 tells of Samuel hearing the Lord, and thinking it was the Priest Eli. After the third time, Eli finally says to Samuel, 'Go and lie down, and if he calls you, say, "Speak, Lord, for your servant is listening"' (1 Sam 3:9).

He was a righteous man, who walked in the ways of the Lord. 1 Samuel 8:3 mentions that his sons did not walk in his ways, and thus were punished by the Lord, but Samuel was righteous before God.

Samuel communicates to the people of Israel a defence of his own integrity. He says, 'Testify against me in the presence of the Lord and his anointed. Whose ox have I taken? Whose donkey have I taken? Whom have I cheated? Whom have I oppressed? From whose hand have I accepted a bribe to make me shut my eyes? If I have done any of these, I will make it right.' They people of Israel reply to Samuel with, 'You have not cheated or oppressed us...' The people were affirming publicly Samuel's integrity.

Samuel would at times cry out to the Lord (1 Sam 15:11).

He may have had integrity and righteousness, but that did not make Samuel a push over! 1 Samuel 15:22-23 tells of Samuel's forthrightness towards Saul, after Saul disobeyed God. You could say that Samuel had a righteous anger at times.

When Samuel died, 'all Israel mourned for him'

DAVID

David was, according to a servant who knew of him, a brave man and a warrior. He was a good communicator and a fine-looking man (1 Sam 16:18).

Samuel anoints David (1 Sam 16:13), and the Spirit of the Lord comes upon him in power.

The story of David and Goliath, you have this sense that David is eager and tenacious. His trust in God is greater than his fear of the giant.

Whatever Saul sent David to do, he did it so successfully, that Saul gave David a high rank in the army (1 Sam 18:5). 'In everything he did he had great success, because the Lord was with him' (1 Sam 18:14)

David built loyalty amongst some. He developed a strong bond of mateship with Jonathan (1 Sam 20: 4).

David inquired of the Lord regularly (1 Sam 23:4).

David had an opportunity to kill Saul (1 Sam 24), but he cuts off a small portion of Saul's robe and becomes, 'conscience-stricken'.

Humility was a key characteristic of David's life. Even with Saul chasing him down wanting to kill him, David still called Saul, King, and continued to call himself a servant (1 Sam 26:18).

Even David questioned Yahweh's plan for him at times - 'One of these days I will be destroyed by the hand of Saul' (1 Sam 27:1). Though remember God had anointed him a long time ago by Samuel to become King. (David experiencing Doubt)

David was greatly stressed at one point, because people wanted to stone him (1 Sam 30:6), 'But David found strength in the Lord his God.'

David loved to worship God (undignified). The predominant writer of the Psalms.

Saul was the people's King and David was God's chosen King.

SOLOMON

Bathsheba gave birth to David's son - Solomon.

Solomon was God's appointed King of Israel (not his brother Adonijah) (1 Kings 1:11-14).

David said to Solomon, 'So be strong, show yourself a man, and observe what the Lord your God requires. Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go...' (1 Kings 2:2-4).

Solomon was known as a man of wisdom (1 Kings 2:9).

Solomon was young, when given the reigns of kingship. He prayed, 'So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong' (1 Kings 3:9).

'God gave Solomon wisdom and very great insight, and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the sand on the seashore' (1 Kings 4:29).

Men would come from all around to hear Solomon's wisdom.

David had a vision, through the prophet Nathan to build a temple for Yahweh. Solomon built the temple.

David was the visionary

Solomon was the organiser/administrator

Solomon failed to 'finish strong'. 'The Lord became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice. (1 Kings 11:9-11). The Lord tears away the Kingdom from his successors, and so we begin the topsy-turvy period of the Kings in the Bible.

Explanation:

This is all correct, and say they were cleansed through all of these sinless and righteous actions.

7 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is a traditional type of Scandinavian architecture? a. vertical log construction b. horizontal log constr
Stells [14]

Answer:

(b) horizontal log construction

Explanation:

Horizontal log construction is the method of construction used in Scandinavia during the middle ages. This type of construction is characterized with naturally round horizontal logs which are scribed along lateral joints so that the top log fits tightly to the log below. Major buildings were built in a historical styles borrowed from abroad, with vernacular wooden, stones and brick structures.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The poster was produced by the us government who is its target audierice
EleoNora [17]
Young and able men who wanted to serve in the war
8 0
3 years ago
What was the goal of unions like the national labor union and the knights of labor
skelet666 [1.2K]

The National Labor Union (NLU) followed the unsuccessful efforts of labor activists to form a national coalition of local trade unions. The National Labor Union sought instead to bring together all of the national labor organizations in existence, as well as the "eight-hour leagues" established to press for the eight-hour day, to create a national federation that could press for labor reforms and help found national unions in those areas where none existed. The new organization favored arbitration over strikes and called for the creation of a national labor party as an alternative to the two existing parties.

The NLU drew much of its support from construction unions and other groups of skilled employees, but also invited the unskilled and farmers to join. On the other hand, it campaigned for the exclusion of Chinese workers from the United States and made only halting, ineffective efforts to defend the rights of women and blacks. African-American workers established their own Colored National Labor Union as an adjunct, but their support of the Republican Party and the prevalent racism of the citizens of the United States limited its effectiveness.

The NLU achieved an early success, but one that proved less significant in practice. In 1868, Congress passed the statute for which the Union had campaigned so hard, providing the eight-hour day for government workers. Many government agencies, however, reduced wages at the same time that they reduced hours. While President Grant ordered federal departments not to reduce wages, his order was ignored by many. The NLU also obtained similar legislation in a number of states, such as New York and California, but discovered that loopholes in the statute made them unenforceable or ineffective.

In early 1869, the Chicago Tribune boasted that the NLU had 800,000 members; Sylvis himself put the figure at only 600,000. Both of these figures turned out to be greatly exaggerated.[2] It collapsed when it adopted the policy that electoral politics, with a particular emphasis on monetary reform<span>[citation needed]</span>, were the only means for advancing its agenda. The organization was spectacularly unsuccessful at the polls and lost virtually all of its union supporters, many of whom moved on to the newly formed Knights of Labor. The depression of the 1870s, which drove down union membership generally, was the final factor contributing to the end of the NLU.

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was the effect of the founding of Constantinople?
    10·2 answers
  • Which of the following religions originated in Southwest Asia?
    13·2 answers
  • Explain one positive effect of changing temperatures for Africa.
    13·1 answer
  • In order to override a presidential veto, Congress must pass the bill again, but this time with a super majority. This means tha
    13·2 answers
  • What was the Supreme Court's decision of the Brown v. Board of Education case? Why was this case a turning point for African Ame
    7·1 answer
  • What is united state code
    7·2 answers
  • Why should you be skeptical when viewing posts on the internet?
    6·1 answer
  • What holiness mean ?
    6·1 answer
  • 2. Analyzing Why did some Southern leaders want to<br> develop industry in the South?
    9·1 answer
  • Which item is an example of a secondary source
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!