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
ExtremeBDS [4]
3 years ago
14

Please help!

History
1 answer:
Ira Lisetskai [31]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

1. Johannes Gutenberg was a German blacksmith known for inventing the mechanical movable type printing press. His printing press has been widely considered the most important invention of the modern era because it profoundly impacted the transmission of knowledge

2. Nationalism is a way of thinking that says that some groups of humans, such as ethnic groups, should be free to rule themselves. Nationalists think that the best way to make this happen and avoid control or oppression by others is for each group to have their own nation.

3. inquisition

4. Nikita Khrushchev and Mikhail Gorbachev both pursued reformist policies during their respective periods as head of the CPSU. Although their policies were very different in substance, the political problems they faced in prosecuting reform were quite similar. The discussion here focuses on the obstacles facing reform-minded Soviet leaders and the options available for overcoming them. Both Khrushchev and Gorbachev were dependent for their position and for the implementation of their policies on a party-state apparat whose interests lay in opposing radical reform and in limiting the leader's power. As a result both men were in a particularly weak position from which to pursue reformist policies.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
President Jefferson promoted policies for easy purchase of land west of the Appalachian Mountains, sponsored the Lewis and Clark
MatroZZZ [7]

Answer:

President Jefferson knew that taking the territory of the west after the purchase of Lussian could have favorable economic and geopolitical consequences for the new nation, could have a route to the northwest for trade, curb France's ambition to explore this territory with the argument of some scientific expedition and curb the growth of the USA, in turn having a country with salinity to the Atlantic and Pacific would achieve a prosperous nation, On expanding the executive power, it was clear that if it could have a strong ejective government, it could generate more support for the federal states, indicating everything through the constitution.

Explanation:

4 0
4 years ago
How did renaissance inventions reflect humanism?
Naddika [18.5K]

Answer:

How was humanism used in the Renaissance?

Renaissance humanism was a revival in the study of classical antiquity, at first in Italy and then spreading across Western Europe in the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries. ... During the Renaissance period most humanists were religious

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Explain the overall impact of the spread of islam
bogdanovich [222]

The spread of Islam, from its heartland in the Middle East and North Africa to India and Southeast Asia, revealed the power of the religion and its commercial and sometimes military attributes.

8 0
3 years ago
How is a cryptid a modern day animal legend?
Ray Of Light [21]
Cryptids are animals whose existence are believed to be real by many people but scientific evidence is lacking. For some, circumstantial evidence may exist but none are full supported by science. Hope this answers the question. Have a nice day.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
while this country never formally joined to Axis Powers or joined World War ll, it did form an alliance with Germany and did in
Otrada [13]

Axis would have probably wiped out most of its West-European enemies. Canada would probably have tried to fight against America and failed, getting its armies crushed, or stayed on the defensive. Hitler would probably have had more troops and peace of  mind tromping around around the Soviet grounds, and would have lost a lot less manpower than when the US actually went to war in the real WWII. Since I'm assuming that in this hypothetical scenario, the US was allied with Japan, Pearl Harbor never happened. Japan and America would both have undisputed hold of the Pacific, with America's (unsunken) battleships and aircraft carriers along with Japanese suprbattleships like the Yamato, and dual force garrisons on the pacific islands. America might have invaded the lower Americas as well, if it didn't stop at securing the border. Mexico might have joined in to help the Axis powers. Then Hitler would still turn on Stalin, still loose an ungodly portion of his army in Russia, get driven back, and start losing the war in the European theatre, at least until axis forces come to back him up, primarily in the form of American Axis soldiers. Then America would lose many men in the Russian front, until it finally invaded Russia somehow (probably after many years and the combined nuclear armaments research being conducted by the US and Nazi Germany.) After invading Russia, Hitler will grow pompous and attempt to invade America with his already weakened force. He would attempt to destroy the remaining American troops in the European/Asian Theatre. America and Japan would probably ally with each other to maintain their hold of the Pacific, and fight back, with a smaller scale D-Day happening (Only made up of Americans) being launched from the invaded and annexed New American Britain or New German Britain or whatever. America would invade Germany, while Germany cannot invade America (see other Quora posts for explanations on why it is virtually impossible to invade America). America ends up with territories and troops spread all across the Pacific, Africa, Russia, Europe, and Asia, with probably troops in Canada and Mexico as well. Consequently, the troops will be brought down through the freedom fighters and rebellions that will ultimately pop up. Hitler shoots himself in the bunker as well.

Lots of bloodshed. Thank god it didn't happen this way! A lot of countries would be utterly in ruins after this version of the World War, not just Poland and Germany and England and Russia and Korea and China (etc.), but who knows how many more countless places. Not to say that I am okay with WWII happening how it did anyway, since it was extremely bloody as well, but... the real WWII was a giant bloody clash of death. This hypothetical one wouldn't have been a clash. It would have been a giant cluster that resulted in possibly twice or three times as many deaths, mostly more civilian deaths in general.

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which movement of African people was
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following statements best describes the importance of the battle of Guadalcanal
    6·2 answers
  • Which European nation claimed Alaska
    6·2 answers
  • The federalist felt that a bill of rights did not need to be added to the constitution. The anti-federalist, on the other hands,
    15·1 answer
  • Which of the following is a characteristic of human geography?
    9·2 answers
  • Describe the 19th Amendment and the rights it guarantees.
    8·2 answers
  • Citing specific evidence from machiavelli's the prince (not from the textbook), identify, and briefly explain, the qualities of
    15·1 answer
  • What did inventions such as radio, motion pictures, affordable cars, improved
    13·1 answer
  • Please need at least 3-5 sentences.
    11·1 answer
  • how did the development of the British colonies in the Chesapeake, southern Atlantic coast, and west indies, change throughout t
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!