The difference lies in interpreting the two sides of the conflict. McPherson saw the war as the war between the evil South and the good North. He was focused on the abolition of slavery and their integration into the society as free people. Horwitz on the other hand saw South not as evil but as a faction which went to war to protect its economic interests.
To mine raw materials and enslave people for cheap labor.
Answer:
The U.S. economy sank into recession early
in the 1990s and then rebounded with the
longest running expansion in the Nation’s
history.1 Real gross domestic product (GDP)
growth slowed in 1990 as the country slipped into
recession. By 1992, however, recovery began and
GDP grew throughout the remainder of the decade. Nonfarm payroll employment increased by
nearly 21 million workers during the decade.2
Employment in export-sensitive industries followed a cyclical pattern, turning down for the
1990–91 recession and the later Asian economic
crisis. Reduced defense spending resulted in job
losses in defense-related industries, especially
early in the decade.
Explanation:
Hope this helps! :)
I
think the answer to this question would be <u>“They would have disagreed on the
idea that war, poverty, disease, and famine were natural checks to population
growth.”
</u>
<span>This based upon that Karl Marx thought that population growth
would cause things like lack of resources. Meanwhile, Adam smith wanted more
people to be born.</span>
Answer:
It doesn't work for me sorry
Explanation:
