#1) How are today's communication technologies and communicators different from those Orwell imagined in "1984"
Answer: The technology was used for controlling means by placing telescreens and clandestine microphones everywhere, at work, market places or even in the comforts of their own home. Today's technologies are not used for that purpose.
Let’s start with the basics first… The Dust Bowl was the name given to the drought-stricken Southern Plains region of the United States, which suffered severe dust storms during a dry period in the 1930s. As high winds and choking dust swept the region from Texas to Nebraska, people and livestock were killed and crops failed across the entire region. The massive dust storms caused farmers to lose their livelihoods and their homes. Deflation from the Depression aggravated the plight of Dust Bowl farmers. Prices for the crops they could grow fell below subsistence levels. In 1932, the federal government sent aid to the drought-affected states. Now here is why it stopped or how we stopped it. While the dust was greatly reduced thanks to ramped up conservation efforts and sustainable farming practices, the drought was still in full effect in April of 1939. In the fall of 1939, rain finally returned in significant amounts to many areas of the Great Plains, signaling the end of the Dust Bowl. Hope this helps!
Answer:
The reasons of the rise of nativism in the 1920s and 19030s were the increase of immigrants, the call of the citizens arguing the loss of access to opportunities and the bigger difficulties they suffered due to the competitive environment.
Answer:
<em>Ganesh Man Singh (Nepali:गणेशमान सिंह) (November 9, 1915 – September 18, 1997) was the leader of the democratic movement of 1990 in Nepal. He is revered as the Father of Democracy and the Iron-man of Nepali politics.</em>
Pro slavery advocates believed slave owners had a right to transport slaves into the territories; antislavery advocates argued that this gave slave holding settlers an unfair advantage over non-slave holding settlers.
Pro slavery advocates argued that the slave status of Kansas should be determined by popular vote; antislavery advocates argued that Kansas should be free because of its location north of the 36° 30' parallel.
Pro slavery advocates contended that free African Americans in Kansas should not be permitted rights under the state constitution; antislavery advocates argued that the federal constitution took precedence over Kansas’s state constitution.
Pro slavery advocates held that slavery in the state was legal, as established in the Missouri Compromise of 1820; antislavery advocates argued that this legislation was invalidated by the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Dred Scott case.
