The colonization period in Haiti was difficult, one of the hardest ones in all the Americas, the slavery was cataloged as the cruelest ever known, and the general live conditions for middle and lower classes were not good at all.
At the bottom of the social pyramid were the slaves, however the french soldiers had really hard duties on those times, they can be cataloged like <em>¨White slaves¨</em>, obviously they haven´t to perform the slave´s work, however duties turning around the slavery, extended shifts and dreadful life conditions made their work a difficult one.
So Haitian Slaves and French soldiers were technically in a similar spot, however, the slaves had survival and another kind of advantages over the French soldiers, a key point was the resistance or partial immunity to different diseases, unfortunately, that wasn´t the French´s case.
Yellow fever was a major issue to the French forces in Haiti, debilitated the army, and was one of the key points of the posterior events (the slavery and Haiti revolutions).
So definitely the two kinds of newcomers to Haiti, haven´t the same fate, the majority of slaves adapted quickly to new territory. the opposite happened to the French soldiers.
Many people believe the United States should of helped Germany after World War One. After WW1 the Treaty of Versailles created a great depression in Germany, because of the aggressive reparations. Many historians believe that the end of WW1 caused World War 2.
I think that the US did have the right to prevent the spread of communism. Any nation that turned communist (except for Yugoslavia) turned out to be because the Soviets arranged it to threaten the US. For example; the Soviets used Cuba to place missiles in the Americas, and China used Vietnam to threaten NATO outposts in the South China Sea. Any nation that was communist was clearly aligned with the USSR, and determined to threaten the US.
The correct answer is B. The natural law emphasizes on the natural sense of moralities, and duties hat people have to live peacefully, positively and preserving of good. The lawmakers got inspired by this and thought about the role of government and the individual rights of the people, that would have impacted the prosperity in longer terms.
Dynastic cycle (traditional Chinese: 朝代循環; simplified Chinese: 朝代循环; pinyin: Cháodài Xúnhuán) is an important political theory in the Chinese history. According to this theory, each dynasty in Chinese history, rises to a political, cultural, and economic peak and then, because of moral corruption, declines, loses the Mandate of Heaven, and falls, only to be replaced by a new dynasty. The cycle then repeats under a surface pattern of repetitive motifs.[1]
It sees a continuity in Chinese history from early times to the present by looking at the succession of empires or dynasties, implying that there is little basic development or change in social or economic structures.[2] John K. Fairbank expressed the doubts of many historians when he wrote that "the concept of the dynastic cycle... has been a major block to the understanding of the fundamental dynamics of Chinese history."[3]
