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
Rudiy27
3 years ago
6

How did the American Revolution affect England Culture?

History
1 answer:
Vinil7 [7]3 years ago
5 0

Britain spent a huge amount of money fighting the Revolutionary War, increasing national debt hugely and creating a yearly interest of nearly ten million pounds. Taxes had to be raised as a result. The trade which Britain relied on for wealth was severely interrupted, with imports and exports experiencing large drops and the recession which followed caused stock and land prices to plummet. Trade was also affected by naval attacks from Britain’s enemies, and thousands of merchant ships were captured.

On the other hand, wartime industry such as the naval suppliers or the elements of the textile industry which made uniforms experienced a boost, and unemployment fell as Britain struggled to find enough men for the army, a situation which would cause them to hire German soldiers. British ‘privateers’ experienced as much success preying on enemy merchant ships as almost any of their opponents.

The effects on trade were also short term, as British trade with the new USA rose to the same levels as trade with them in colonial form by 1785, and by 1792 trade between Britain and Europe had doubled. Additionally, while Britain gained an even larger national debt, they were in a position to live with it and there were no financially motivated rebellions like those of France.

Indeed, Britain was able to support several armies during the Napoleonic wars (and even field its own instead of just paying for other peoples). It's been said that Britain was even right to lose the war because of the economic benefits.

You might be interested in
HELP
torisob [31]

Answer:

At the start of the twentieth century there were approximately 250,000 Native Americans in the USA – just 0.3 per cent of the population – most living on reservations where they exercised a limited degree of self-government. During the course of the nineteenth century they had been deprived of much of their land by forced removal westwards, by a succession of treaties (which were often not honoured by the white authorities) and by military defeat by the USA as it expanded its control over the American West.  

In 1831 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall, had attempted to define their status. He declared that Indian tribes were ‘domestic dependent nations’ whose ‘relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian’. Marshall was, in effect, recognising that America’s Indians are unique in that, unlike any other minority, they are both separate nations and part of the United States. This helps to explain why relations between the federal government and the Native Americans have been so troubled. A guardian prepares his ward for adult independence, and so Marshall’s judgement implies that US policy should aim to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream US culture. But a guardian also protects and nurtures a ward until adulthood is achieved, and therefore Marshall also suggests that the federal government has a special obligation to care for its Native American population. As a result, federal policy towards Native Americans has lurched back and forth, sometimes aiming for assimilation and, at other times, recognising its responsibility for assisting Indian development.

What complicates the story further is that (again, unlike other minorities seeking recognition of their civil rights) Indians have possessed some valuable reservation land and resources over which white Americans have cast envious eyes. Much of this was subsequently lost and, as a result, the history of Native Americans is often presented as a morality tale. White Americans, headed by the federal government, were the ‘bad guys’, cheating Indians out of their land and resources. Native Americans were the ‘good guys’, attempting to maintain a traditional way of life much more in harmony with nature and the environment than the rampant capitalism of white America, but powerless to defend their interests. Only twice, according to this narrative, did the federal government redeem itself: firstly during the Indian New Deal from 1933 to 1945, and secondly in the final decades of the century when Congress belatedly attempted to redress some Native American grievances.

There is a lot of truth in this summary, but it is also simplistic. There is no doubt that Native Americans suffered enormously at the hands of white Americans, but federal Indian policy was shaped as much by paternalism, however misguided, as by white greed. Nor were Indians simply passive victims of white Americans’ actions. Their responses to federal policies, white Americans’ actions and the fundamental economic, social and political changes of the twentieth century were varied and divisive. These tensions and cross-currents are clearly evident in the history of the Indian New Deal and the policy of termination that replaced it in the late 1940s and 1950s. Native American history in the mid-twentieth century was much more than a simple story of good and evil, and it raises important questions (still unanswered today) about the status of Native Americans in modern US society.

Explanation:

Plz give me brainliest worked hard

8 0
3 years ago
The purpose of the 13 amendment ?
Vesna [10]

Answer:

Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th amendment abolished slavery in the United States and provides that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States,

Explanation:

Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th amendment abolished slavery in the United States and provides that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States,

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
5. Which of the following statements best describes Kennedy's domestic achievements
poizon [28]

Answer:

Kennedy wasn’t able to get much done due to opposition from Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress.

Explanation:

President Kenedy was more concerned in the affairs of people and wanted an increase in the minimum wages and salaries of the citizens. He also wanted a better healthcare system and facilities which would be more affordable for use by the people. His efforts were however frustrated.

This is because he wasn’t able to get much done due to opposition from Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress.

5 0
3 years ago
In 1821, Mexico became an independent republic, free from Spain. At the time, Texas was
Aleksandr-060686 [28]

Answer:

A. was called Tejas and belonged to Spain.

Explanation:

According to the text, in 1821 “Texas was known as Tejas...a largely unsettled part of Mexico.” And Mexico “became an independent republic, free from Spain” in 1821. So before 1821, part of Texas most likely belonged to Spain.

5 0
3 years ago
What was significant about the Battle of Lexington? A Minutemen faced British troops and forced them back at a bridge. e B. Minu
ELEN [110]

Answer: A. Minutemen faced British troops and forced them back at a bridge.

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Who persuaded President Roosevelt to create the Fair Employment Practices Commission to guard against discrimination in defense
    6·1 answer
  • How did Russia become a communist country
    8·2 answers
  • For most of the fifteenth century, the __________ were the most powerful rulers and art patrons in northern europe.
    8·2 answers
  • What factors made the creation of a federal judiciary controversial in the 1780s
    13·1 answer
  • _______ was a teacher who was arrested for teaching evolution in the 1920s
    11·2 answers
  • A 19th-century english social darwinist would say that his or her nations power was proof of
    13·1 answer
  • Leading up the Civil War, the South had an economy based on agriculture and slave labor while the North had an economy based on
    14·2 answers
  • Compare and contrast how Hoover and Roosevelt responded to the Great Depression according to the text. How did their actions imp
    8·1 answer
  • Just a pre writing
    15·1 answer
  • I need help asap like now!
    9·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!