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
Alexxandr [17]
4 years ago
10

Which goal was most important to the Indian

History
2 answers:
cestrela7 [59]4 years ago
7 0

Answer:

(1) independence from British rule

Explanation:

The independence of India consisted in revolutions that began in 1857 and that came to an end under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi between 1942 and 1947, as well as with the invasion of British India by the Indian National Army commanded by Subbash Chandra Bose during the Second World War. Independence was finally achieved on August 18, 1947.

"The Independence Movement" is quite diffuse, since it covers different movements with similar objectives. The main one was channeled through the National Congress Party, which followed Gandhi's preaching of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru also participated in the movement. Other leaders like Subhash Chandra Bose adopted a military position towards independence.

The independence of India served as a catalyst for similar movements in other parts of the world, which produced the disintegration of the British empire and its replacement by the Commonwealth. The non-violent movement of Gandhi was the inspiration of other movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr. and the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa led by Nelson Mandela.

Pavel [41]4 years ago
6 0
There are several ways in which goals were important to the Indian nationalist movement, the best option from the list would be "<span>(1) independence from British rule"</span>
You might be interested in
I’m stuck between A and D. But I strongly think it’s A.
Len [333]

Answer:

It’s D. The 6th amendment in the bill o rights made it so we have a right to a trial with jury. When your arrested you haven’t been charged yet. You get charged in criminal court.

8 0
3 years ago
How might life in the Americas have been different if the Ice Ages had not occurred?
Anna71 [15]

Answer:

hi how are you

The Missouri River would have flowed north across Canada. There would be no Hudson’s Bay. The Ohio River would not exist. Instead the “New” River of West Virginia would have flowed north to the St. Lawrence. There would be no Great Lakes.

The British colonies would have remained hemmed in along the Atlantic. There would be no easy access to the Mississippi and the interior might well have remained solidly French. If you did somehow get to the Mississippi, there would be no Missouri River to take you to the Rocky Mountains. There would be no Detroit, Chicago or Milwaukee.

you meant something like that?

4 0
4 years ago
Which best describes W. E. B. Du Bois's opinion of Booker T. Washington’s accommodationist approach?
Aleks04 [339]
Well, it reinforced segregation and and discrimination. 
3 0
3 years ago
Compare the social climate of the United States at the beginning of the Great War to the social climate at the end of the war. H
Rina8888 [55]

USA enters the Great War

Wilson’s most passionate desire, aside from avoiding belligerency, was to bring an end to the war through his personal mediation. He sent Colonel House to Europe in early 1915 to explore the possibilities of peace and again early in 1916 to press for a plan of Anglo-American cooperation for peace. The British refused to cooperate, and the president, more than ever eager to avoid a final confrontation with Germany on the submarine issue, decided to press forward with independent mediation. He was by this time also angered by the intensification of British blockade practices and convinced that both sides were fighting for world domination and spoils. On December 18, 1916, Wilson asked the belligerents to state the terms upon which they would be willing to make peace. Soon afterward, in secret, high-level negotiations, he appealed to Britain and Germany to hold an early peace conference under his leadership.

Break with Germany

Chances for peace were blasted by a decision of the German leaders, made at an imperial conference on January 9, 1917, to inaugurate an all-out submarine war against all commerce, neutral as well as belligerent. The Germans knew that such a campaign would bring the United States into the war, but they were confident that their augmented submarine fleet could starve Britain into submission before the United States could mobilize and participate effectively.

The announcement of the new submarine blockade in January left the president no alternative but to break diplomatic relations with Germany, which he did on February 3. At the same time, and in subsequent addresses, the president made it clear that he would accept unrestricted submarine warfare against belligerent merchantmen and would act only if American ships were sunk. In early March he put arms on American ships in the hope that this would deter submarine attacks. The Germans began to sink American ships indiscriminately in mid-March, and on April 2 Wilson asked Congress to recognize that a state of war existed between the United States and the German Empire. Congress approved the war resolution quickly, and Wilson signed it on April 6. (For U.S. military involvement in World War I, see the article World War I.)

“Big Four”

“Big Four”

The “Big Four” (left to right): David Lloyd George of Britain, Vittorio Orlando of Italy, Georges Clemenceau of France, and Woodrow Wilson of the United States, the principal architects of the Treaty of Versailles.

National Archives, Washington, D.C.

The fight over the treaty and the election of 1920

Public opinion in the United States seemed strongly in favour of quick ratification of the Versailles Treaty when the president presented that document to the Senate in July 1919. Traditional isolationist sentiment was beginning to revive, however, and a small minority of 16 senators, irreconcilably opposed to U.S. membership in the League, vowed to oppose the treaty to the bitter end. In addition, a crucial controversy developed between the president and a majority of the Republican senators, led by Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts. Lodge insisted upon adding 14 reservations to the treaty. The second reservation declared that the United States assumed no obligations under Article X of the Covenant, which guaranteed the integrity and independence of members of the League; moreover it said that the president could not use the armed forces to support the Covenant without the explicit consent of Congress.

Henry Cabot Lodge

Henry Cabot Lodge

Henry Cabot Lodge, c. 1898.

Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (Digital File Number: cph.3b25369)

Calling this reservation a nullification of the treaty, Wilson in September made a long speaking tour of the West to build up public support for unconditional ratification. He suffered a breakdown at the end of his tour and a serious stroke on October 2. The president’s illness, which incapacitated him for several months, increased his intransigence against the Lodge reservations; with equal stubbornness, the Massachusetts senator refused to consent to any compromise. The result was failure to obtain the necessary two-thirds majority for ratification, with or without reservations, when the Senate voted on November 19, 1919, and again on March 19, 1920.

Wilson had suggested that the ensuing presidential campaign and election should be a “great and solemn referendum” on the League. The Democratic candidate, James M. Cox of Ohio, fought hard to make it the leading issue, but the Republican candidate, Warren G. Harding of Ohio, was evasive on the subject, and a group of 31 leading Republican internationalists assured the country that Harding’s election would be the best guarantee of U.S. membership in the League of Nations. Harding swamped Cox (see U.S. presidential election of 1920),

4 0
2 years ago
Ethnic separatism can be defined as the desire by a group of people to form their own country
cricket20 [7]

Answer:

Ethnic separatism is the desire to form a separate country by a group of people who share a common trait: ethnicity. An ethnic group is a group of people who identify with each other based on ancestry, language, history, social rules, nation or culture

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What important development helped increase public safety in the 1890s?
    11·2 answers
  • what were the differences between the working class, upper class during the socialist reformers during the progressive era
    14·1 answer
  • What was the most significant act of this Congress? Defend your answer.
    13·1 answer
  • Which best describes Ngo Dinh Diem?
    9·1 answer
  • How did the Republican Party earn the nickname “Radical Republicans?”
    11·2 answers
  • Native american society was a ______ society; European society was _____
    7·1 answer
  • MULTIPLE ANSWERS AND WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST
    11·1 answer
  • Dos de America
    7·1 answer
  • What helped the Allies begin to win World War I?
    7·1 answer
  • Explain about the use of exploration and discoveries for Europe???​
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!