All categories

4 years ago

Should the u.s written a new constitution

History

1 answer:

saw5 [17]4 years ago

3 0

Answer:

I would say yes.

Explanation:

this is a matter of opinion, but I think yes. my reasoning is that the basis it was written on was that of a different time, so some things are as applicable now as they were back then. while some things are still relevant, others have become obsolete. so we might not need to start from scratch with a completely new constitution, in some peoples opinions, but it's hard to deny that we need to edit some parts of it to make it more relevant in this day and age.

You might be interested in

The rich citizens of ancient Rome often had two homes, a home in the city and a country home, called a villa.

ivanzaharov [21]

True is the answer to your question

3 0

3 years ago

The largest battle fought in Florida was the Battle of

guajiro [1.7K]

Answer:

the Battle of Olustee

Explanation:

On February 20, 1864, at the Battle of Olustee, the largest conflict fought in Florida during the Civil War, a Confederate force under General Joseph Finegan decisively defeats an army

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Predict what events/actions will be central to the Reconstruction time period. Use evidence from the image to support your claim

gregori [183]

This political cartoon ("Awkward Collision on the Grand Trunk Columbia") depicts a staunch President Andrew Johnson and Congressman Thaddeus Stevens are having a standoff between the two trains, "President," and "Congress."

You can barely see it, but at the bottom of the political cartoon it says:

[ A.J. (Driver of Engine ‘President’) – “Look here! One of us has got to back." Thaddeus (Driver of Engine ‘Congress’) – "Well, it ain’t me that going to do it – you bet!” ]

Johnson and Stevens both had a staunch position on their reconstruction policies, and were unwilling to compromise, this eventually led to Johnson's impeachment.

** Background information about Thaddeus Stevens:

Thaddeus Stevens was considered a radicial republican during the reconstruction era, and he was an early critic of Johnson's plan for reconstruction (he eventually became the leader in the effort to impeach Johnson).

Stevens was an advocate of treating southern states as "conquered provinces." He encouraged strong, sweeping action by the federal government to revolutionize the institutions and culture that bolstered white supremacy in the south.

Stevens supported the 14th amendment and an unsuccessful plan to confiscate plantations and redistribute the land to former slaves.

Johnson's plan was similar to Lincoln's, except he wanted 10% of the southerners (that voted in 1860) to give an oath of loyalty to him. Basically, Johnson's reconstruction plan was to eventually forgive the Confederates of their war crimes. 

** More information about Johnson's reconstruction plan:

The Confederate states were required to uphold the 13th Amendment, swear loyalty to the Union, and pay off their war debt. Then they would rewrite their state constitutions, hold elections, and begin sending representatives to Washington. Under the plan, Confederate leaders would have to apply directly to President Johnson in order to request pardon. Johnson's last pardon was given to former President Jefferson Davis (of the Confederacy) on December 25th, 1868.

5 0

3 years ago

Was the United States better off in 1920 than in 1898 as a result of this involvement in

Alina [70]

The period from 1890-1920, known as the Progressive Era, marks a period in U.S. history when the country underwent multiple changes. Population growth, waves of immigrants, advances in industry, and other factors led many Americans to the conclusion that the country’s governmental systems needed to be radically altered in order to better fit the interests of the nation. The country not only amended many of its domestic policies, it also developed a new strategy concerning foreign affairs that differed from the traditional stances of the Founding Era. One such alteration was an increase in the country’s willingness to take military action in foreign conflicts. As such, the Progressive Era marks a time period in which the United States began to practice a foreign policy that was international in its scope and did not focus solely on defending American citizens and their property. The Spanish-American War (1898) epitomized this shift toward global intervention. The United States entered the war for various reasons, but at its heart, the conflict was motivated by the desire to promote the ideals of civilization, democracy, and freedom around the world. The traditional policy the country followed from the founding of the country up until the Progressive Era certainly promoted these principles globally but encouraged neutrality in foreign wars unless U.S. citizens or their property faced duress. Fearing the cost of a large, professional army, as well as the dangers a power-hungry general with a large force behind him might pose to the republic, the Founders favored limiting foreign military involvement. By focusing instead on defending the country, military forces and costs would not need to be so large. Multiple factors, however, including increased military strength, the desire to promote Western civilization, and globalization led to a shift in policy. During the Progressive Era, the United States took a more active role in international affairs by fighting around the world in the name of ideals as opposed to merely the defense of the homeland.

4 0

3 years ago

Was the American Revolution justified?

Lyrx [107]

Answer:

yes i think so

Explanation:

4 0

4 years ago

Read 2 more answers