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
katovenus [111]
3 years ago
10

Why did the first immigrants come, and what happened between them and the native people

History
1 answer:
Inga [223]3 years ago
5 0
The first immigrants came to America looking for gold and for a new passage to the West Indies. The natives were seen as problem and were dealt with very harshly by the first immigrants, the Spaniards.
You might be interested in
What were the Spanish “reconcentration camps”?
german
Food was scarce and famine and disease quickly swept through the camps. By 1898, one third of Cuba's population had been forcibly sent into the concentration camps. Over 400,000 Cubans died as a result of the Spanish<span> Reconcentration Policy.</span>
8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Choose a current issue that relates to the protection of individual rights. Write an argument that makes a claim related to whet
Romashka [77]

Answer:

Thesis: Mill argues that it is in the best interest of society to promote individuality which ensures  liberty over using authority to conform subjects to a particular type of person conducive to  following orders.

Definitions

Liberty: Mill defines Liberty using three basic criteria developed on page 15.

1. An individual maintains the ability to freely think and feel on all subjects and may  express their thoughts,

2. An individual maintains the ability to freely frame their own life according to their tastes  and preferences regardless of public opinion, providing that their choices do not harm  others.

3. An individual maintains the ability to freely unite with other free individuals, providing that  the purpose of uniting is not the harm of others.  Clearly, individual rights are closely tied to Liberty. Using this definition of Liberty, Mill links the  protection of certain individual rights to Liberty.

Arguments

Argument 1: Opinions (pg. 22-23 & 43)

Promoting individuality leads to a multitude of opinions which creates a broad dialogue  where opinions and discussed and refined until they become uncontested truths. Only by  listening to all sides of an issue can one be wise and reach an uncontested truth. Mill  furthers that “the well-being of mankind may almost be measured by the number and  gravity of the truths which have reached the point of being uncontested.” The opinions  and dialogue associated with individuality will therefore increase progress. It follows that maintaining individuality is in the best interest of society so that uncontested truths, and  subsequently progress, may be increased.

Argument 2: Individuality builds character in a society (pg 59)

Mill argues that the expression of an individual’s desires and impulses define a person’s  character. He further claims that “one whose desires and impulses are not his own, has  no character, no more than a steam engine has character.” Society in turn benefits from  strong characters. Mill argues that society needs people of strong characters in order to  progress. Therefore, by preferring individuality, society builds character which helps general welfare.

Argument 3: Individuality is required for the progression of society (pg. 62-63)Mill claims that “individuality is the same thing [as] development, and that it is only the  cultivation of individuality which produces… well-developed human beings.” This is  because the originality comes from individuals directing their own life which is needed for  progress (like discovering new truths or challenge old truths.) As Mill contends, “genius  can only breathe freely in an atmosphere of freedom.” Without these geniuses, “human  life would be a stagnant pool.” By linking it to progress, it is clear that society can  effectively better itself through individuality.

Counter Arguments

There are two type of counter-arguments that are anticipated to our claim that society is better  off to promote individuality. The first is that the role of society is not best spent focusing on promoting liberty. The second is that individuality does not benefit society.

Counter-Argument 1: Role of Society is to use Authority to control subject Instead of how Mill defines the role of society as cultivating individualism, one might  argue that the role of society is to use authority to coerce subjects. Past philosophers  like Hobbes argued that it is best for subjects to be under a powerful sovereign. One  may argue that the role of society is not to cultivate individuality, but rather use authority  to suppress individuality for the best interest of society.

Counter-Argument 2: Calvinistic Theory (pg. 61)

Mill presents the case that one may argue that human nature is not good. In this case,  society would only be hurting itself by trying to cultivate individuality. This falls in line with  Calvinistic Theory that human’s main objective is to obey God’s command and that  human nature is corrupt. This would mean that it would be detrimental for society to try  to promote individuality since it impedes human’s main purpose.

Counter-Argument 3: Customs

Similar to the arguments presented by Tocqueville, one may argue that customs are an  important part of maintaining a society. The type of individualism that Mill argues for  diminishes the power of customs because it begs people to challenge customs with  individual thought. People like Tocqueville may argue that individuality is bad because it  diminishes the role customs.

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Thomas jefferson favored a political system in which
My name is Ann [436]
In which the states retained the majority of political power.
6 0
4 years ago
Which of the following is the main source of conflict and fighting in the Middle East between Israel and palestine
tangare [24]

The main issue is <u>land</u> and who is in control of it. The conflict between Israel and Palestine began in regard to the creation of the State of Israel.  Palestinians and Arab nations in the region did not welcome the establishment of a Jewish state on what had for centuries been Arab territory.

Details/context:

There had been Jewish immigration into the Palestine region since the end of the 19th century.  The movement of Jews back to what they saw as their ancestral territory escalated with the Zionist movement in the early 20th century.  Persecution against Jews in Europe (notably, pogroms in Russia in the 19th century and the Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany in the 20th century) increased pressure for Jews to leave European countries.  

The Palestine region had been part of the Ottoman Empire up until the end of World War I.  A mandate system authorized a member nation of the League of Nations to govern a former German or Ottoman colonial area after the conclusion of World War I.  The former Ottoman provinces of Syria, Iraq and Palestine in the Middle East were divided into a French mandate territory and British mandate territory.  The British exercised mandate rule over Palestine.  

After the Second World War II ended in 1945, the United Nations (UN) adopted a plan for the partition of Palestine that would create a portion of that territory as the state of Israel, with the other part as an independent state for Palestinian Arabs.  The Arabs in the region and surrounding Arab nations were not in favor of this, because they opposed the creation of a Jewish state in their region.  

As the British were ending their mandate governance of the region in May, 1948, the Jewish leaders in the land proclaimed their independence as a nation.  A war with Arab peoples and nations in the region followed.  Israel won that war and established itself as a nation.  Over 700,000 Palestinians fled their homes and land and have not been able to regain independent rights to their territory.

The new state of Israel was granted membership in the UN in 1949.  Israel won a series of wars (in 1967, 1973 and beyond) over against Arab states in the region.  Palestinians have made efforts against Israeli control, notably with movements called "Intifadas," in 1987 and 2000.  They have not been able to achieve nationhood status, however.

6 0
4 years ago
How did people in the north feel about the civil war? How did the war influence the economy in the north?​
vovangra [49]

Answer: the north was pro human rights and against slavery though While the agricultural, slave-based Southern economy was devastated by the war, the Northern economy benefited from development in many of its industries, including textile and iron production. The war also stimulated the growth of railroads, improving transportation infrastructure.

Explanation:

please please mark as brainliest

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why did Ethiopia become increasingly isolated from its neighbors over the centuries?
    15·1 answer
  • President bush and obama's foreign policies with iran were different for what reasons
    8·1 answer
  • Why was Louise Brown famous in 1978?
    9·1 answer
  • The early civilizations of Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa began around.
    6·1 answer
  • What text structure did the writers of the english bill of rights use to frame their argument?
    10·2 answers
  • Was Thomas Jefferson a "copycat" or Revolutionary Thinker?
    11·1 answer
  • According to the declaration, how have the colonists “British brethren” responded to the Americans problems
    9·1 answer
  • Which civilization ended most recently? Olmec, Maya, Aztec, or Inca
    13·1 answer
  • Select the items that explain why Grant wanted to capture Vicksburg.
    10·1 answer
  • Wrrite a poem about one aspect of slave control on the sugar plantation in the caribbean.
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!