I am pretty sure it is the first answer because it is the only one talking about the effects of television
Answer:
The national origins quota system ended.
Explanation:
Migration refers to the movement of a group of people from one geographical region (location) to another geographical destination in search of better living conditions, work or social amenities.
Population change equation states that the change in the size of a population over a specific period of time is equal to the sum of the number of births and the number of immigrants that joined.
Mathematically, the population change equation is given by the formula;
Population Change = (Natality - Mortality) + (Immigration - Emigration)
The Immigration Act and Naturalization of 1965 is also referred to as the Hart-Celler Act and it was enacted by the IS Congress to abolish the previous quota system based on national origins in the United States of America.
Hence, an effect of the Immigration Act of 1965 was that it ended the national origins quota system.
I would say there were all D. This is because in the Battle of Camden the British were outnumbered and still won which was s <span>humiliating defeat for Gates, the American general best known for commanding the Americans at the British defeat of </span>Saratoga, whose army had possessed a large numerical superiority over the British force. As well as this at the Siege of Charleston the British won. <span>The loss of the city and its 5,000 troops was a serious blow to the American cause. </span>
Answer:
United Kingdom-cultural change
Explanation:
It was in this period that private life achieved a new prominence in British society. The very term “Victorianism,” perhaps the only “ism” in history attached to the name of a sovereign, not only became synonymous with a cluster of restraining moral attributes—character, duty, will, earnestness, hard work, respectable comportment and behaviour, and thrift—but also came to be strongly associated with a new version of private life. Victoria herself symbolized much of these new patterns of life, particularly through her married life with her husband, Albert, and—much later in her reign—through the early emergence of the phenomenon of the “royal family.” That private, conjugal life was played out on the public stage of the monarchy was only one of the contradictions marking the new privacy.
However, privacy was more apparent for the better-off in society than for the poor. Restrictions on privacy among the latter were apparent in what were by modern standards large households, in which space was often shared with those outside the immediate, conjugal family of the head of household, including relatives, servants, and lodgers. Privacy was also restricted by the small size of dwellings; for example, in Scotland in 1861, 26 percent of the population lived in single-room dwellings, 39 percent in two-room dwellings, and 57 percent lived more than two to a room. It was not until the 20th century that this situation changed dramatically. Nonetheless, differences within Britain were important, and flat living in a Glasgow tenement was very different from residence in a self-contained house characteristic of large parts of the north of England. This British kind of residential pattern as a whole was itself very different from continental Europe, and despite other differences between the classes, there were similarities among the British in terms of the house as the cradle of modern privacy. The suggestive term “social privacy” has been coined to describe the experience of domestic space prior to the intervention of the municipality and the state in the provision of housing, which occurred with increasing effect after mid-century. The older cellular structure of housing, evident in the tangle of courts and alleys in the old city centres, often with cellar habitations as well, resulted in the distinction between public and private taking extremely ambiguous form. In the municipal housing that was increasingly widespread after mid-century, this gave way to a more open layout in which single elements were connected to each other.
Answer:
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was an 1854 bill that mandated “popular sovereignty”–allowing settlers of a territory to decide whether slavery would be allowed within a new state's borders. hope that helps!
