Brainly.com
1
HIGH SCHOOL HISTORY 5 points
According to the communists, why was it important to destroy the "4 Olds" during the cultural revolution
1
ASK FOR DETAILS FOLLOW REPORT by bayleimeyer 01/18/2016
ANSWERS
taskmasters
taskmasters Genius
2016-01-19T00:07:54+00:00
Before answering, let us first establish what these "4 Olds" are. The "4 Olds" that we are talking about here are China's Old Ideas, Old Customs, Old Culture, and Old Habits. Mao Zhe Dong, the founding father of the People's Republic of China, was the one that led into the annihilating of the "4 Olds" of China. This is in response to what was currently happening at that time. There was a Russian revolution which began failing and became one of the reasons that led to the destroying of the "4 Olds". Urban Stratification was also feared to come up. And this way, elitism would be demolished. Some would say that Mao wanted to secure his own place in history which pushed the decision on destorying the "4 Olds".
Answer:
The Middle Ages is a period characterized by decline of cities and reduced movement of people. People stayed in the rural areas rather than in the cities, and there was little trade or immigration. The common people were tied to their land (manors), farmed it, and send portions to their lords. Change came when farmers and small-scale craft producers increasingly met in towns or cities to trade goods, and developed into trade guilds. These guilds became powerful as financiers backed merchants/farmers/craft producers, stimulating trade and development of market economy. The resulting growth of wealth urged peasants to flock into cities, bringing an end to manorialism
Answer:
The Great Migration, formally spanning the years 1916 to 1917, was deemed in scholarly study as “the relocation of more than 6 million African Americans from the rural South to the cities of the North, Midwest and West.” As white supremacy steadily ruled the American south, and the dismal of economic opportunities and extremist segregationist legislation plagued greater America, African Americans were driven from their homes in search of more “progressive” acceptance in the North, or rather, above the Mason-Dixon line. Did you know that in the year 1916, formally recognized by scholars of African-American history as the beginning of The Great Migration, “a factory wage in the urban North was typically three times more than what blacks could expect to make as sharecroppers in the rural South?” In Northern metropolitan areas, the need for works in industry arose for the first time throughout World War I, where neither race nor color played a contributing factor in the need for a supportive American workforce during a time of great need. By the year 1919, more than one million African Americans had left the south; in the decade between 1910 and 1920, the African-American population of major Northern cities grew by large percentages, including New York (66 percent), Chicago (148 percent), Philadelphia (500 percent) and Detroit (611 percent). These urban metropolises offered respites of economical reprieve, a lack of segregation legislation that seemingly lessened the relative effects of racism and prejudice for the time, and abundant opportunity. The exhibition highlights The Great Migration: Journey to the North, written by Eloise Greenfield and illustrated by Jan Spivey Gilchrist, to serve as a near-autobiography highlighting the human element of the Great Migration. “With war production kicking into high gear, recruiters enticed African Americans to come north, to the dismay of white Southerners. Black newspapers—particularly the widely read Chicago Defender—published advertisements touting the opportunities available in the cities of the North and West, along with first-person accounts of success.” As the Great Migration progressed, African Americans steadily established a new role for themselves in public life, “actively confronting racial prejudice as well as economic, political and social challenges to create a black urban culture that would exert enormous influence in the decades to come.”
Explanation:
<span>The New York Times "ethicist" contest call into the question the assumption that it is natural and right to eat meat by asking people to write persuasive arguments in favor of eating meat.</span>
