Answer:
Except for the second statement, all others are correct descriptions of the Jim Crow laws.
Explanation:
Jim Crow laws started after the Reconstruction period (1863-1877) and served to keep now former slaves, the African-Americans, from having equal rights as the white people had.
Based on the truthless argument of "separate but equal" these laws created spaces that black people did not have access to, leaving the best positions in many places for the whites. The separation was the way white supremacists chose back then to enforce their violence upon black people.
The "equal" in the aforementioned phrase was empty as violence against African-Americans was explicit; lynchings of black men, for example, were common. Black American citizens didn't have their civil rights respected, not in practice (the right to vote was constantly disrespected) nor in theory (Jim Crow laws violated many civil rights)
<span>A stance that supports a particular interpretation of history is known as B. a historical argument. This is when you choose what to believe in - history may be interpreted in many ways, and all of them can be either wrong or correct, but it is up to you to choose that analysis which you thing is the right one. That analysis will be called a historical argument, because you will provide others with arguments as to why that interpretation should be correct.</span>
E would be your answer............
When soldiers went away to war their jobs needed to be replaced to keep the economy stable, women were able to take this opportunity and work in factories for munitions and sewing and many other things, this was a big step in the right direction to gender equality, after WW1 people started to change their attitude and realised that women can work and can do just as good as men in some countries they were given the vote and more opportunities opened for women in different industries and they were able to make a living for themselves instead of being reliant on a husband to get money for their whole family
