Answer:
For well-off white professionals who were part of the Progressive movement, Keene writes, taking an interest in the war in Europe was part of becoming “citizens of the world.” Some of them formed the Committee for Relief in Belgium (CRB). True to the technocratic orientation of Progressivism, they tackled the problem of helping civilians in German-occupied areas in practical terms, negotiating with both Germany and Britain to allow shipments of food and clothing past their military forces.
Explanation:
Answer:
The smaller population states have more power by using the Electoral College than they would otherwise.
Explanation:
The Electoral College of the United States is made up of electors who elect the President and Vice President of the United States. The Constitution determines how many voters each state has; in practice, the number is the same as the total numebr of congressmen that each state has.
Voters do not directly elect the President and Vice President of the United States, but vote through the constituencies of their own state. Voters can, in principle, vote for any candidate, but in practice undertake to vote for a particular candidate, and thus voters know how to cast their vote through their constituents for their own candidate. This is an example of an indirect election method.
The smaller popularion states tend to support the electoral college more emphatically than the larger population states, since this voting mechanism implies an equalization in the proportion of votes by the smaller states with respect to the larger states. Otherwise, if it were the case of direct vote by citizens, four or five states could be decisive, leaving other citizens on a secondary level.
TRANSLATED ANSWER :explain how the process of the earthen enclosures in England influenced the English revolutionary process during the seventeenth century : ANSWER : Enclosure (sometimes inclosure) was the legal process in England of consolidating (enclosing) small landholdings into larger farms.[1] Once enclosed, use of the land became restricted to the owner, and it ceased to be common land for communal use. In England and Wales the term is also used for the process that ended the ancient system of arable farming in open fields. Under enclosure, such land is fenced (enclosed) and deeded or entitled to one or more owners. The process of enclosure began to be a widespread feature of the English agricultural landscape during the 16th century. By the 19th century, unenclosed commons had become largely restricted to rough pasture in mountainous areas and to relatively small parts of the lowlands.
Enclosure could be accomplished by buying the ground rights and all common rights to accomplish exclusive rights of use, which increased the value of the land. The other method was by passing laws causing or forcing enclosure, such as Parliamentary enclosure involving an Inclosure Act. The latter process of enclosure was sometimes accompanied by force, resistance, and bloodshed, and remains among the most controversial areas of agricultural and economic history in England. Marxist and neo-Marxist historians argue that rich landowners used their control of state processes to appropriate public land for their private benefit.[2][better source needed] During the Georgian era, the process of enclosure created a landless working class that provided the labour required in the new industries developing in the north of England. For example: "In agriculture the years between 1760 and 1820 are the years of wholesale enclosure in which, in village after village, common rights are lost".[3] E. P. Thompson argues that "Enclosure (when all the sophistications are allowed for) was a plain enough case of class robbery."[4][5]
W. A. Armstrong, among others, argued that this is perhaps an oversimplification, that the better-off members of the European peasantry encouraged and participated actively in enclosure, seeking to end the perpetual poverty of subsistence farming. "We should be careful not to ascribe to [enclosure] developments that were the consequence of a much broader and more complex process of historical change."[6] "The impact of eighteenth and nineteenth century enclosure has been grossly exaggerated ..."[7][8]
Enclosure is considered one of the causes of the British Agricultural Revolution. Enclosed land was under control of the farmer who was free to adopt better farming practices. There was widespread agreement in contemporary accounts that profit making opportunities were better with enclosed land.[9] Following enclosure, crop yields increased while at the same time labour productivity increased enough to create a surplus of labour. The increased labour supply is considered one of the causes of the Industrial Revolution.[10] Marx argued in Capital that enclosure played a constitutive role in the revolutionary transformation of feudalism into capitalism, both by transforming land from a means of subsistence into a means to realize profit on commodity markets (primarily wool in the English case), and by creating the conditions for the modern labour market by transforming small peasant proprietors and serfs into agricultural wage-labourers, whose opportunities to exit the market declined as the common lands were enclosed.
If Americans were aware of the repeal of England's Orders in Council, they may not have gone to war.
