1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Elis [28]
3 years ago
5

Who did many Americans expect to put the slavery issue to an end?

History
1 answer:
vampirchik [111]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

The abolitionist movement was an organized effort to end the practice of slavery in the United States. The first leaders of the campaign, which took place from about 1830 to 1870, mimicked some of the same tactics British abolitionists had used to end slavery in Great Britain in the 1830s. Though it started as a movement with religious underpinnings, abolitionism became a controversial political issue that divided much of the country. Supporters and critics often engaged in heated debates and violent — even deadly — confrontations. The divisiveness and animosity fueled by the movement, along with other factors, led to the Civil War and ultimately the end of slavery in America.

Explanation:

Brainliest if this helped :)

You might be interested in
What is culture in your own words? :)
kkurt [141]
A friend of mine just asked me about this, so I have lots of thoughts about it. This may be deeper than you need, but here goes: My initial feelings about culture lead me to think of simply a “way of life” but if I think about it just a bit more, I notice that the word “way” connects to the idea of a path or perhaps even a journey – as in “let’s go this way” or “you go your way, and I’ll go mine.” Of course there is a collective nature to culture, so culture is like a collective journey or shared path. But I also get a feeling of boats on a river. Each boat has a certain level of individual freedom, but collectively they are all floating down the same river, so there is a sort of shared movement and common history despite whatever individual movements or relationships there might be among or between the individual boats. And of course rivers have branches, so some boats follow one branch while other boats follow other branches, so shared histories diverge and thus different cultures have very different characteristics.

Getting a bit more philosophical/esoteric, I also get an image of the individuals in a culture existing like cells in body. Different cells belong to different bodies, but each body defines the context – the role, function , or “meaning” – of the individual cells. The “essence” of a brain cell is different than the essence of a liver cell, and these differences in essence are correlated with their different roles – but these roles, in turn, spring from their function in the overall body – and this is what culture does; it is the larger “body” or context that defines a great deal of our essence as conscious individuals. Just as there is a degree of literal truth in the old saying “You are what you eat,” I sense a degree of literal truth in the idea that we are, to a significant degree, constituted by the culture in which we live. Our bodies are constituted by the materials we ingest, and our minds are constituted by the “psychical material” that we ingest, and the contextual meaning of this “mental food” comes from or culture. I want to emphasize the word ‘constituted’ because it is a lot stronger than just saying “influenced by” – it gets at the idea that our culture becomes part of our actual, deep, essence.

As for examples from my own life…well…since I am a philosopher, a great deal of my life IS thinking about stuff like this, so in a way, I have been speaking from my own life this whole time. For various reasons stemming from my interest in philosophy of mind, I do not believe that there are any such things as isolated (or isolatable) conscious individuals. A major part of the essence of a conscious individual is the context which provides the systems of meaning-relations that constitute the very nature of consciousness. Consciousness, I believe, is culturally constituted. Without culture there is no consciousness, and without consciousness, there are no selves, no egos. Without my consciousness there is no “me” as the individual that I am. But I know you are asking for something more personal, so let’s see…here is one concrete example: I was raised in a culture that values monogamy and devalues alternative lifestyles. For various reasons I have protested against this cultural mainstream. To borrow from my boats/river metaphor, you might say that my wife and I have spent a lot of time “swimming up stream” on this issue. Part of our role in life – one of the labels defining who we are as individuals is our membership in “alternative lifestyles”. But notice that this definition of who we are – this aspect of our identity – only has meaning in the context of a culture that values monogamy. Even tho we don’t flow with the majority, our lives are still to some extent defined by the flow of the majority – the overall flow of the culture that gives our status as “protesters” the very meaning that it has. We are who we are because of the culture, even when we don’t flow with the culture. It is part of our very essence as individuals, and we cannot abandon this essence no matter how hard we try (or at least we can’t abandon it without losing our selves in the process).
Source(s):
Sorry if I’ve rambled a bit. I’ve taken classes on hermanutics, semotics, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, etc. I don't consciously remember much of anything from these classes (I just don’t have a memory for details), but I guess I must be learning something along the way, cuz me can sure talk big words ;-) I guess you could say that the verbal diarrhea you are now experiencing is another example from my personal life. It is who I am. I am the crazy dude who spouts nonsense all over the place – the one you’d probably be embarrassed to bring home to meet your mom.
7 0
3 years ago
Select the two leading production areas in the United States by the early 1900s.
jasenka [17]

Answer:

Middle Atlantic

North Central

Explanation:

although the person above me had one of the answers, they didn't quite answer it right, but the answers I have put above are correct because I took the test and got those right.

hope this helped! have a good week and weekend! :D

5 0
2 years ago
What was Cortina's major contribution to Mexican Texans in the mid-<br> nineteenth century?<br> I
const2013 [10]
Hero of the Poor After the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), which established the Texas boundary at the Rio Grande, Cortina rose in prominence as a leader of poor Mexicans along the river whose lands were being taken by the U.S. gov- ernment.
4 0
2 years ago
Allied Powers : <br> Central Powers :
Pavel [41]

Answer:

Allied powers : World War II the chief Allied powers were Great Britain, France (except during the German occupation, 1940–44), the Soviet Union (after its entry in June 1941), the United States (after its entry on December 8, 1941), and China. Conflict: World War II. Who Were the Allies: The main Allied powers were Great Britain, The United States, China, and the Soviet Union. The leaders of the Allies were Franklin Roosevelt (the United States), Winston Churchill (Great Britain), and Joseph Stalin (the Soviet Union).

Central powers : The Central Powers, also Central Empires, was one of the two main coalitions that fought World War I (1914–18). It consisted of Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria; hence it is also known as the Quadruple Alliance.The Allies described the wartime military alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire as the 'Central Powers'. The name referred to the geographical location of the two original members of the alliance, Germany and Austria-Hungary, in central Europe.

Explanation:

I tried my best army-....hope it helps :)

stream life goes on and dynamite we'er about to reach 1B

#westankings

<em><u>#BTS</u></em>

6 0
3 years ago
Which of the following conflicts had the greatest impact on the drawing of the borders shown on this map?
andrew-mc [135]
The answer is WW1
the middle east was carved up by Russia,Britain and France after ww1,following the demise of the ottoman empire. The countries decided to divide the region into spheres of influence among st each other. The imperial powers signed a secret agreement known as <span> the Sykes-Picot agreement.</span>

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The shinto religion is most closely associated with which country of east asia?
    8·1 answer
  • How old was amelia earhart when she disappeared?
    12·2 answers
  • What marks the boundary between the mesozoic and the cenozoic?
    5·1 answer
  • What is the name for a sudden and dramatic change in political power? A. restoration B. civil war C. divine right of kings D. po
    5·1 answer
  • What can cause Extinction of a species
    9·2 answers
  • What states voted for hillary clinton ?
    15·1 answer
  • What achievement did the old kingdom and the new kingdom of ancient Egypt have in common?
    10·2 answers
  • Which term refers to marking on a map that runs in an east and west direction and measures distance north and south of the equat
    15·1 answer
  • Help meee please???I would appreciate ut
    8·1 answer
  • The final battle beast of revelation
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!