Answer:
The French traded furs for iron tools, kettles, wool blankets, and other supplies, while Native Americans exchanged furs for items from all over the world.
Explanation:
Before Europeans arrived in the mid-1600s, Native Americans traded throughout the rivers of present-day Minnesota and across the Great Lakes. Following that, European American traders traded manufactured products for precious furs with Native Americans for approximately 200 years.
Fur-bearing animals were mostly trapped by the Dakota and Ojibwe in the Northwest Territory. In the region's forests and streams, they obtained a variety of furs, the most important of which was beaver. Traders from France, the United Kingdom, and the United States offered blankets, rifles and ammunition, fabric, metal tools, and brass kettles in return for the furs.
(Hope this helps can I pls have brainlist (crown)☺️)
Answer:
B. Japan and China competed for influence in Korea.
May I have brainliest please? :)
Answer:
The goal of voting is to elect representatives by the voice of the people. However when only two parties are allowed to run, American choices are restricted by limited views and only given two choices. This restriction seems to be effective, but is simple not accomplishing the goal of electing the representatives the people actually want. <u>This argument says that a 2 parties system is bad </u>
Here is another argument
While the constitution does not provide language that explicitly endorses a two party system, a great deal of its laws perpetuate their existence like the electoral college and plurality voting. The electoral college makes it virtually impossible for a third party candidate to win any given office by discouraging votes in individual states amongst other things. Likewise, plurality voting, which guarantees the candidate with the majority of votes wins, generally favors two opposing sides as time goes by. This is only made stronger by the fact that The majority of Americans seem to lean towards the right or left, with a small percentage staying in between. As long as these systems are in place, a two party system will naturally prevail. <u>This argument says that the 2 parties system is good.</u>
Explanation:
It's just how you look at really if you think its bad then your think its bad same goes for the person who says its good. It's just an opinion. But each side will have supporting facts and details.
Impressment was a violation of neutral rights
