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
qaws [65]
3 years ago
8

Which of the following does not describe a characteristic of a monopoly?

History
1 answer:
Anna71 [15]3 years ago
3 0
A. because it’s not a characteristic of a monopoly
You might be interested in
Explain with detail why the ratification process was much closer than <br> it appear
skelet666 [1.2K]

There was a lot of public discussion in the States over the Constitution's ratification procedure. Nine of the thirteen State legislatures needed to ratify it in order for it to go into force; unanimity was not necessary.

First, three-fourths of state conventions or state legislatures must support each amendment. Getting many states to concur on a long-lasting amendment to the Constitution is exceedingly challenging.

However, it wouldn't be until 1790 that the Constitution would eventually be accepted and ratified by all states. Roadblocks included disagreements about the delegates' authority, anti-federalist phobias, and the absence of a Bill of Rights. However, the new administration's concessions and pledges ultimately resulted in a solution.

To learn more about ratification

brainly.com/question/28246915

#SPJ1

4 0
1 year ago
Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

5 0
1 year ago
3. What pivotal role did the Vietnam War play in changing U.S. military policy in the Cold War?
tia_tia [17]
My Answer: Nixon recognized the citizen's Republic of China in an attempt to diminish the USSR's global influence. 

Hope I helped! :D

6 0
3 years ago
Why is the territory containing Rome called the Papal States?
AURORKA [14]
Because it is the state within the state. Vatican is a state which is governed by the Pope.
7 0
3 years ago
The importances of Gorbachev new thinking for Soviet control of Eastern Europe
Semenov [28]
They love the black people know in days 

6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • What were the main tenets of lutheranism, zwinglianism, calvinism, and anabaptist and how did they differ from each other and fr
    7·1 answer
  • A colony run by a governor who was directly responsible to the crown was called
    8·1 answer
  • John Green (the narrator) states that Latin America led the world in Transculturation - cultural blending or the mixing of cultu
    15·1 answer
  • How did earthquakes contribute to the destruction of over seventy villages in Tibet?
    8·1 answer
  • What slight improvement does lady macbeth make in the plan for the murder?
    15·1 answer
  • In the section "organization of trenches" what we're the four types of trenches used by the allies
    6·1 answer
  • Need some help with war and peace questions.When the troops started running from the french at austerlitz?
    7·1 answer
  • Help please! "Who were the early explorers; what countries did they represent and where did they travel to?"
    14·1 answer
  • What did sargon and Hammurabi share
    15·2 answers
  • What is the Hindi meaning of Gagan​
    12·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!