these points are similar to each other but I think it is the first, so allows the governor to appoint the state legislatures.
I discovered that a key moment in Roman history was a very little-discussed raid by pirates on the Port of Rome at Ostia.
Rome was at that point the dominant world superpower, and there was no state in the world that would ever have dared to attack Rome. But the Romans were attacked by a group of stateless desperados who set fire to the Port. The flames may well have been visible in Rome itself. And this sent a shockwave through Rome, because if pirates could strike that close to the imperial capital, nowhere was safe.
And in this panicky atmosphere - an atmosphere of panic, I might say, which was deliberately whipped up by ambitious politicians - the Roman people took a series of fatal steps, surrendering some of their liberties and some of their control over their government. And in doing so, they sewed the seeds of the destruction of their own democracy.
And the more I looked at that event, the more it seemed familiar to me and the parallel with 9/11 - and in particular the response to it.
The economic value of having colonies in the first place was for 3 main reasons
1) attain cheap labour from the native peoples
2) acquire cheap raw materials to bring to the homeland (Europe)
3) open up new markets to trade with
the first two were vital in Britains industrial revolution. Without cheap raw materials, and cheap labourers, the factories and refineries in Britain would have costed far more to maintain and keep supplied. This, in turn, would have slowed down production considerably. There is no doubt in my mind that the industrial revolution would still have taken place in Britain with or without the colonies, but WITH the colonies the process was sped up considerably.
Overall, cheap labour and raw materials attained through Britains colonial interests sped up the industrialisation of the UK.
Answer:
The muckrakers were reform-minded journalists in the Progressive Era in the United States (1890s–1920s) who exposed established institutions and leaders as corrupt. They typically had large audiences in popular magazines.
Explanation:
I believe the answer is C
