Yes.
<span>In 1281, Kublai Khan and his Mongol Army attempted to invade the islands of Japan by sea. The Mongols were winning the their invasion until unexpectedly, a typhoon came through off the coast of Japan and destroyed the Mongol forces and fleet enroute to Japan. The people of Japan considered this to be a great turn of fortune for them. They believed that this great storm was sent to them as protection from the heavens and is credited with saving the Japanese Empire. It was called the Kamikaze, or Divine Wind.
</span><span>By the fall of 1944, it had become clear that the Japanese were again losing in a struggle for their empire. This time however, they were losing to the American and Allied forces in the Pacific Theater of World War II. Short on resources as well as victories, the Japanese again turned to this “divine” force in the belief that it would again save them from total annihilation by foreign forces. Only this time, instead of it being a “divine wind,” it came in the form of men who were willing to sacrifice their lives in order to help their country. These suicide pilots took on the name “kamikaze” and applied it to their airborne missions.</span>
The headright system
The headright system caused an increasing difference between wealthy landowners and worker in Jamestown. The headright system was originally created in 1618 in Jamestown, Virginia. It was applied as a way to attract new settlers to the region and address the labor shortage, with the rise of tobacco farming, a large supply of workers was wanted, and as more people came into the region, it later increased tensions between Native Americans and colonists, enslaved servants were granted lands, which was near the natives, this migration produced conflict between the natives and the enslaved servants.
The headright system also resulted in the wealthy becoming wealthier with no benefit to the laborers.
Rockefeller3.Beginning with a small oil refinery, this man‘s Standard Oil began to put competitors out of business.
17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Direct Election of U.S. Senators (1913)
The Constitution, as it was adopted in 1788, made the Senate an assembly where the states would have equal representation. Each state legislature would elect two senators to 6-year terms. Late in the 19th century, some state legislatures deadlocked over the election of a senator when different parties controlled different houses, and Senate vacancies could last months or years. In other cases, special interests or political machines gained control over the state legislature. Progressive reformers dismissed individuals elected by such legislatures as puppets and the Senate as a "millionaire’s club" serving powerful private interests.
One Progressive response to these concerns was the "Oregon system," which utilized a state primary election to identify the voters’ choice for Senator while pledging all candidates for the state legislature to honor the primary’s result. Over half of the states adopted the "Oregon system," but the 1912 Senate investigation of bribery and corruption in the election of Illinois Senator William Lorimer indicated that only a constitutional amendment mandating the direct election of Senators by a state’s citizenry would allay public demands for reform.
When the House passed proposed amendments for the direct election of Senators in 1910 and 1911, they included a "race rider" meant to bar Federal intervention in cases of racial discrimination among voters. This would be done by vesting complete control of Senate elections in state governments. A substitute amendment by Senator Joseph L. Bristow of Kansas provided for the direct election of Senators without the "race rider." It was adopted by the Senate on a close vote before the proposed constitutional amendment itself passed the Senate. Over a year later, the House accepted the change, and on April 8, 1913, the resolution became the 17th amendment.
