The reason that transformed U.S Politics in the 1920s is the ascent of progressive politicians. The correct answer is option B. This period was known as the Progressive Era. This transformed the U.S Politics because its aim was to eliminate the corruption in the government.
The United Nations replaced the League of Nations. The League of Nations was a cross-country entity that was composed of many countries in Western Europe and also elsewhere that was supposed to regulate certain aspects of life that were important for all countries on Earth. However, it turned out there were certain key shortcoming of this union of nations, and later the United Nations were developed.
Answer:
First Paragraph:
The events leading to the Boston Massacre weren’t amazing. First, there was the Stamp Act Congress in 1767. These were designed to raise money. The Stamp Act Congress were the original people to let colonies protest the British law. However, the document says that this couldn’t pass because this wasn’t represented by British government. Next, there was the Townshend Act in 1767. This was also designed to raise money. This was put on things like glass, lead, paint, and tea. This led to the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Some patriots decided to dress up as Natives and protest this act and destroy ships full of tea and throw it overboard. They were punished by the government putting out another act. In 1774, The First Continental Congress met up and wrote to the king how angry they were about the tea.
Second Paragraph:
On the night of March 5th, 1770, British soldiers in the Massachusetts bay started firing on a large group of colonists. The soldiers stood in front of the Customs House. The soldiers stood there to stop were there to stop validation up against the Townshend Acts. However, they failed making everyone extremely angry. I don’t believe they were accountable for the murder. They were just acting in self-defense.
Explanation:
The only true statement regarding the Anti-Federalists is that "<span>A. Anti-Federalists were suspicious of a strong central government," since they feared that it would become tyrannical. </span>
<span>This is of course somewhat of a subjective question, but in general most would agree that in general expansion was not justifiable since the Mexicans and Natives were doing nothing to provoke the US. One could argue it was justifiable since Americans needed more land. </span>
