1) What does Bryan say about the status of working people?
Bryan defends the rights of working people, their force and importance at the moment of building progress. Bryan compares workers and businessman and mentions that both are necessary for cities improvement.
Also, he mention that the status of workers is underestimated. Nobody can displace the art of sowing fertile prairies that supply the greatest cities, he tolds. From this work, we take the resources that make the difference.
2) What does Bryan say about the importance of farming?
Bryan defends agriculture over other related business activities. Also, he claims against the political decisions related to gold standards. Workers of the nations will join forces in order to defend the importance of their work.
The gold standard consists of an economic system, valid during the Depression of the 1930s in America. It sets the value of an activity in terms of gold.
3)Explain the point Bryan is making by using the thorns and cross metaphors to describe the gold standard
Bryan is trying to convince an auditory that he is right: workers deserve to be valued. In order to persuade the listeners, he uses the ancient strategies from rethoric, that consist on different figures of speech. For example, the thorns and cross metaphors.
Also, the thorns and crown metaphor connect with very symbolic religious symbols. People value this allegory because they can identify with it.
By the conclusion of the war millions where now living in the United States
Answer:
European nations were rival and they also wanted to get colonies to gain an advantage over their rivals plus it was a sign of prestige and power
Answer:
Alfred Russel Wallace
Alfred Russel Wallace OM FRS (8 January 1823 – 7 November 1913) was an English naturalist, explorer, geographer, anthropologist, and biologist. He is best known for independently conceiving the theory of evolution through natural selection; his paper on the subject was jointly published with some of Charles Darwin's writings in 1858.
Explanation:
hope this helps you if it does please mark brainiest
Answer:Nationalism and revolution have generally been held to go together. Many nation‐states have had their origins in revolution, from the Americans in the 18th century to a host of Third World nation‐states in the 20th century. Generally, both modern revolutions and modern nationalism have the same origins, in 18th century Enlightenment thought. But this paper argues that, despite this common origin, the principles of revolution and nationalism are divergent, and can set one against the other. Revolutions emphasise freedom and equality; nationalism emphasises integration and unification. These principles can clash, though not inevitably and not always. The paper examines the 1789 French Revolution, the 1848 revolutions and the 1917 Russian revolution. It shows that in the first two cases, revolutionary aspirations came up against and were eventually displaced by nationalist aims. In the case of 1917, revolution paradoxically, and unintentionally, institutionalised nationalism. These examples show that, though linked at some high level of modern thought, revolution and nationalism express different and at times divergent strands of modernity.
Explanation: