The correct answers are A and B.
<em>Free trade</em> seeks to eliminate barriers to imports and promote international trade. Yet it can be more than dangerous to the environment. The main concern is the lowering of national environmental standards in order to export more goods. With free trade, large amount of goods are transported every day which contributes to the rise of the carbon footprint of transportation. Increased production on agricultural farms means more pesticide use and more consumption of energy, all harmful to the environment.
<em>Trade barriers </em>can have a negative effect on the developing world ( overproduction and dumping ) but they do help 'infant industries'. Protective tariffs and trade barriers protect brand-new industries from foreign and national competition. This gives the new companies a bit more time to establish their position on the market.
Mao zedong was also known as a chairman
Yes the British did have a large number of merchants
Answer:
death is not allowed in brainly kid friendly here
Answer:
Yes, I would say the passage justifies the resistance.
Explanation:
Armed, violent resistance will never be the ideal mode of solving a conflict. There are far more effective peaceful ways to solve conflicts. However, at the time of Satana (the American West in the 1800s) white settlers represented an existential threat to Native Americans.
They had superior technology, they were settling in large numbers, and they did not have any intention of sharing the land or developing peaceful ways of cooperation.
Only if white settlers and Native Americans had had both a positive attitude towards dialogue and compromise, a peaceful agreement could have been reachd, and armed resistance, avoided.
