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
oksian1 [2.3K]
3 years ago
9

in one to two paragraphs, explain nasts use of cartoons was such an effective tool in his battle to expose the corruption of Tam

many hall​
History
2 answers:
Neporo4naja [7]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

-That cartoons are visual and easy to understand for people who have difficulty reading

-That Nast’s cartoons were clever and funny and that people enjoyed reading them and talking about them, which spread his ideas

-That Nast drew so many cartoons that people began to identify his versions of Tweed and Tammany Hall with the real people

Explanation: Sample answers on edge

o-na [289]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:Nast's use of cartoons was such effective tool in his battle to expose corruption, because it was the easiest way to get to people, and for them to see what was actually going on. If his drawing were publish on the new paper more people wolud be able to see it. A drawing is more effective because you don't need to know how to read to get the message from a picture.

Explanation:

just count on me

You might be interested in
What were the similarities and differences between the Taiping Rebellion and the Boxer Rebellion?
andriy [413]

The Taiping rebellion wished for peace and therefore the Boxer rebellion was created to eliminate foreigners and promote their privileges and that they were similar in this they each diode to reform and helped government realize the requirement for a brand new structure.


Explanation:

Both armies within the Taiping and Boxer rebellions were created of poor peasants. each rebellions had an enormous following by the individuals. The Taiping rebellion favored missionaries, and also the boxer rebellion opposed them.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
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
What happens after a Supreme Court justice is appointed?
Yanka [14]
The justice must be approved by the senate.<span>

</span>
6 0
3 years ago
Definition: In the building of the Transcontinental Railroad in the 1860s, this railroad company began
madreJ [45]

Answer: hopefully this is right.

Explanation: This is the name given to an ethnic group of Native Americans found in the southwestern portion of the United States, and represented by famous leaders such as Geronimo and Cochise.

4 0
3 years ago
Pls help asap, giving Brainliest!!!!! :)
jek_recluse [69]

Answer:

C. and A

Explanation:

hope this helps

4 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • What is jefferson davis legacy?
    12·1 answer
  • A restaurant that creates a new type of sandwich is using __________ as a method of competition.
    8·2 answers
  • Pick an invention from the last 100 years (Not Computers) that was most influential in your community + world. Give 3 reasons fo
    12·1 answer
  • What's the greatest meme of all time (in your own opinion)
    15·2 answers
  • Which of the following were members of the aristocracy in Byzantine society? shopkeepers small-scale merchants soldiers wealthy
    5·2 answers
  • What country fell under the control of an Islamic fundamentalist government in 1979?
    11·1 answer
  • Drag the tiles to the correct boxes to complete the pairs. Match the officers in the executive branch of the Oklahoma state gove
    6·2 answers
  • What are these and this ain’t no t test I swear
    5·2 answers
  • The calendar developed in Rome that had 365 A days was known as the??
    15·2 answers
  • How did France,Spain,and England settle America differently?
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!