The Social Gospel Movement originated during the second half of the 19th century. Its main ideas that good actions led to salvation, as people must emulate the life of Jesus Christ in their day to the activities. American Theoolgist Walter Rauschenbusch was one of the main representatives of this movement.
On the other hand, the progressive movement proposed the idea that of improving society by implementing reforms in education, safety and health that would lead to people's overall well-being, as this was seen as the ultimate goal of progressivism.
The difference between the two movements resides in the fact that the Social Gospel Movement encouraged good acts in the name of Christ, while Progressivism encouraged good efforts for the good of mankind, regardless of any belief.
You mean in practice or in theory? Because with any political party, the outcome is always different.
Goods originated from Mali: gold, ivory, copper;
Goods that Mali obtained through trade: salt, horses;
The Mali Empire was the largest and most powerful African Empire. It was relatively well developed, used its numerous natural resources to get wealth, and was heavily involved in trade. Some of the natural resources of Mali were the gold, copper, and ivory, and this empire used them to get enormous amounts of wealth, as these things were highly demanded and appreciated.
The wealth that Mali was getting, was later used for obtaining things through trade that the empire lacked, like the salt and the the horses. The salt was very popular for the cooking, while the horses were in high demand for transport and warfare.
I believe they were both harmed by nuclear radiation. Hiroshima was when the USA bombed Japan with a nuclear bomb. Chernobyl is the disaster in which a reactor caught fire and caused the harmful radiation to spread. I hope that was helpful. :)
