Answer:
Higgs's argument is stronger because Folsom's primary arguments involved quotes. Quotes can be unreliable, especially if chosen with bias from a selected group of people. Beyond that, quotes from people that lived in the moment are often short-sighted and don't understand long term effects. While Folsom does also source historians, he focuses a lot on Roosevelt's interest spending and believes that the money that went back to the American people actually prolonged suffering. Higgs, however, focuses on the short and long-term effects of the New Deal and uses a lot of data to prove his point. While he does have quotes, he doesn't rely on them to make or break his argument, unlike Folsom. Higgs is also able to understand some of the negatives of the New Deal, unlike Folsom who did not pay any attention to the other side of the issue.
Explanation:
This is for part two of the question.
The choices can be found elsewhere and as follows:
A. being conquered by the Mayans.
<span>B. Francisco Pizzaro's trap that helped capture and kill the Incan emperor and his men. </span>
<span>C. that the Spanish had superior weapons. </span>
<span>D. that the Spanish brought with them
</span>
I think the correct answer is option A. All of the following aided in the decline of Incan Empire except being conquered by the Mayans. Hope this answers the question.
Answer:
Semejanzas y diferencias entre las civilizaciones mayas, aztecas e incas. 2 ... ¿Qué características de la organización política ... ¿Cuáles fueron las principales características ... El período de esplendor azteca terminó después que el de la civilización inca. ... e incas”. Reflexiona respecto de tu aprendizaje en este capítulo.
According to Jefferson himself, you could divide man in two kinds:
1) Those who did not trust people or feared them. Those people, supposedly, wished to prevent them from having powers by giving that power to a specific class that would hold the responsibility of watching over the people and the nation.
2) Those who are confident in the people and their individual liberties and consider them mostly honest and good people. In that case, there would be no need to give great powers to a higher class. In fact, that would be counterproductive to their ideals.
You will find those two lines of thinking in pretty much every country and every culture. They are considered often as Left or Right, Progressive or Conservative, Liberal or Socialist and so on.
That showed up quickly in the USA since when the Whigs party emerged, it did as opposition to the Democrat Party. Showing an early duality from the beginning of the American Democracy. And even if you have a multiparty system like other countries, you can easily find them dividing generally in two sides that internally agree with MOST issues but disagree fundamentally in many with the opposition.
