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
stich3 [128]
3 years ago
5

Which statement describes how relations between blacks and whites changed from the antebellum (before the Civil War) South to th

e Jim Crow era? A. Whites and blacks had never associated with one another before the war but were free to do so under Jim Crow. B. Before the war, blacks and whites often had close ties despite slavery, but under Jim Crow they were kept apart. C. The laws of the Jim Crow era recognized no differences between blacks and whites. D. After the war, blacks and whites were treated equally in public places, such as restaurants and railroad cars.
History
2 answers:
Dmitry_Shevchenko [17]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

B is the answer

Explanation:

KIM [24]3 years ago
4 0
Before the war, blacks and whites often had close ties despite slavery, but under Jim Crow were kept apart (B). As a result of Jim Crow laws African Americans and white populations in the American south were separated by a large legal apparatus that was created to prevent their interaction and coexistence. Although slavery led to distorted levels of contact between blacks and whites before the Civil War there was more contact than occurred during the Jim Crow period of the south which used racially oppressive laws to segregate races in the South. 
You might be interested in
Roosevelt would be most likely to AGREE with which of the following statements? *
DaniilM [7]
For the first question I believe is D, and the second question I think is D as well
8 0
3 years ago
The difference between gentleman’s warfare and militia warfare in the revolutionary war
jekas [21]

Answer:

There's a popular belief that Americans fought and won the entire revolution with nothing but guerrilla warfare. That's not true, and the myth largely stems from how the war began. The very first military engagement between British and American forces occurred on April 19 of 1775. American militia men had been covertly transporting weapons and colonial government leaders from town to town, hiding them from the British army. The British heard about these stockpiles in the Massachusetts towns of Lexington and Concord and went to seize them. The American volunteers of these town gathered together to oppose the British, resulting in a brief skirmish. As the British beat a hasty retreat back towards Boston, American militia units basically popped out of the bushes along the entire road, shot a few volleys, and disappeared. It wasn't enough to decimate the British, but the British weren't prepared for it, and it drove them back.

Explanation:

Imagine that you are in charge of leading a small army of volunteer soldiers against the largest and most powerful professional army in the world. Are you going to march straight into battle? Not if you expect it to be a very long one!

For centuries, small armies have relied on guerrilla warfare to help even the odds. This includes non-traditional wartime tactics like ambushing, sabotage, and raids rather than direct engagements. Guerrilla warfare is not meant to really defeat an opponent; instead, the idea is to make the war drag on and become so expensive that your adversary gives up. It's the different between fighting a professional boxer versus a swarm of mosquitoes - the mosquitoes won't kill you, but they just may drive you away.

Amongst the many armies to try out these tactics were the American colonists fighting for their independence. The American Revolution was a conflict between a group of volunteers and a massive professional army. Did they think they could defeat Britain, the heavyweight champion of European colonialism? Maybe not, but while Britain prepared to defend its title, it was the colonists who learned how to 'float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.'

8 0
4 years ago
What nation founded Peru?
uranmaximum [27]

The Spanish Empire founded Peru.

5 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why were the ideas of Syed Ahmed shaheed failed
andreev551 [17]

Because if the Mujahideen were fighting in Metikot, many more Sikh fighters would have been killed. ... Thus he was killed and his body could not be identified by the Mujahideen. For this reason, even after a long time, the remaining Mujahideen could not believe that the death of Syed Ahmad Barelvi was true.

3 0
4 years ago
Why did some native Americans resist resettlement
Alik [6]
<span>Hello Ulzamiki1,
Thank you for posting your question on brainly!

I'm sure they resisted because of the english that came onto their land and proceeded to take away their way of life and to dictate how they would live in the future.</span> [my opinion]

Hope i helped!
Cheerio!
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • how did the Ancestral Puebloans adapt their housing to the building materials that were available in the arid Southwest
    8·1 answer
  • PLZ HELP!!!!!!!!<br> Was boss tweed a good person? Why?
    13·2 answers
  • Pretend you are a British government official during the time leading up the revolutionary war. Write a 2-3 paragraph letter to
    6·1 answer
  • What was the Confederate goal in the western theater during the Civil War?
    9·2 answers
  • How is the principle of popular
    11·1 answer
  • How has the Internet affected modern America?
    8·1 answer
  • How did fascist philosophies contribute to the Holocaust?
    15·2 answers
  • Connecting the past to the present helps you to know how people have _____.
    10·1 answer
  • 4. Pretend you are Columbus; Write a diary entry explaining what you felt and the things
    15·1 answer
  • What is the land like along the coast in Maine?
    13·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!