Answer:
The Chinese Communist Revolution that culminated in the 1949 founding of the People’s Republic of China fundamentally transformed class relations in China. With data from a nationally representative, longitudinal survey between 2010 and 2016, this study documents the long-term impact of the Communist Revolution on the social stratification order in today’s China, more than 6 decades after the revolution. True to its stated ideological missions, the revolution resulted in promoting the social status of children of the peasant, worker, and revolutionary cadre classes and disadvantaging those who were from privileged classes at the time of the revolution. Although there was a tendency toward “reversion” mitigating the revolution’s effects in the third generation toward the grandparents’ generation in social status, the overall impact of reversion was small. The revolution effects were most pronounced for the birth cohorts immediately following the revolution, attenuating for recently born cohorts.
Answer:
D.
Explanation:
The union of state is the answer
I hope it helps
1. B) Burma. France controlled all of the territories listed in Southeast Asia except for Burma. This is because Burma belonged to the UK. Both the UK and French expanded into Southeast for the purpose of acquiring regions during imperialism to obtain raw materials. The French were expelled from the Indochina region following the Vietnam war.
2. B) Japan. Following WWI, the Japanese began to expand a great deal of military and political influence over East Asia and the Pacific. Japan was an industrious island nation, in need of resources for its factories. It also saw itself as the dominant race and nation of East Asia due to its victory over Russia in the early 20th century and its desire for legitimacy in the face of Europe. For these reasons, Japan expanded tremendously around Asia and the Pacific, taking the Dutch East Indies during WWII.
It was Called the frontier because some or most of the areas in America that where settled by ranchers hadn't been explored or discovered yet.
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.
