What does the organizer imply about great Britain

History

1 answer:

lys-0071 [83]4 years ago

5 0

The correct answer is that both nations were imperialist, as the columns shows each country's territorial acquisitions.

In fact, both Japan and the United Kingdom had imperialist ambitions, which resulted in the invasion of other territories and the formation of colonies. That was the case of Manchuria, Korea and Ryukyu, among others, with respect to Japan; and Hong Kong, Bermuda, Canada, Australia, among others, regarding the United Kingdom.

Today, many of these colonies have become independent or are in the process of becoming independent, since these countries have held back their expansionist ambitions.

You might be interested in

The Alternative for the Americas agreement of the early 2000s is primarily aimed at

Oliga [24]

The Alternative for the Americas agreement of the early 2000s is primarily aimed at finding an alternative to "free trade", since some nations view this as being detrimental to their economies.

3 0

4 years ago

Contrasting How did the process of electing a president change after the election of 1800?

Radda [10]

Answer:

This is what I remember (ask someone for clarification)

Explanation:

-In 1800 each state was only allowed to cast a single vote. Back then the people werent allowed to decide who their president was.

Now we have a system that allows the people to vote by electing representatives. The representatives cast the final vote, then deciding who the president is.

3 0

4 years ago

What was the purpose of bread and circuses

poizon [28]

Assuming you're referring to bread and circuses as they existed during the Roman Empire, their purpose was to keep the populous entertained and distracted from the fact that the Empire was in shambles so they wouldn't revolt.

5 0

3 years ago

Which experiences or strenghths did LBG bring to the presidency?

dolphi86 [110]

Answer: LBJ was energetic and hard working. LBJ's congressional experience had taught him how to get bills passed by Congress. People said that LBJ had a great deal of charm.

Explanation:

He was incredibly hard working, and had lots of influence over his former senators on both sides of the aisle, and on the democratic side he had influence on both his fellow southerners and the liberal block. He saved Kennedy's legislative proposals from the failure they were going to suffer under Kennedy's mis-management, and got them passed in an incredibly short time. Sad thing is, he tried repeatedly to tell JFK how to pass them, but he didn't agree

He was also almost maniacal on being the best President he could possibly be.

4 0

4 years ago

What distinguishes the modern presidency from the institution originally envisioned by the framers of the constitution?

Xelga [282]

I think these are the choices to your question:

a. The modern presidency has become the central focus of American politics since the 1930s, supplanting Congress as the "first branch" of government.
b. The modern presidency is less involved in the development of foreign policy than the framers intended.
c. Modern presidents exhibit a greater level of deference to Congress in budgetary matters than the framers intended.
<span>d. Modern presidents are much less democratic than the framers intended.
</span>
I think the answer is, c. Modern presidents exhibit a greater level of deference to Congress in budgetary matters than the framers intended.

8 0

4 years ago