To encourage domestic stability and promoting a free market economy.
Answer:
Marxist Communism main difference with Maoism is the source of the revolution and its extent. In Marxist-Communism the proletariat revolution starts in the cities and industrial areas, trying to achieve control over the means of production. In Maoism, the revolution starts in rural areas and does not require an advanced industry to happen.
The difference is historically important, according to Marx, the proletarian revolution arises inevitably from the class struggle between the Capitalist and the Proletariat. For Marxist-Communism, the revolution emerges from a crisis of advanced capitalism. In Maoism, the revolution can emerge before there is any kind of advanced capitalism.
Marxist-Communism is much more based on historical materialism or the understanding of history and society through the economy. Maoism rejects some of the dogmas of historical materialism.
In a sense, Maoism is more nationalistic because it emerged from practice in the specific conditions of China. It also has a different relationship with the west because it rejects, in principle, industrial development and capitalism as a necessary stage.
Explanation:
Generally speaking, infrastructure means "<span>A. the fundamental facilities and systems that serve an area," although if you're referring strictly to construction, then it would be the beams, foundation, etc. </span>
Mansa Musa inherited a kingdom that was already wealthy, but his work in expanding trade made Mali the wealthiest kingdom in Africa. His riches came from mining significant salt and gold deposits in the Mali kingdom. Elephant ivory was another major source of wealth.
<span>It lasted for 7 years. Americans at the time ascribed the reason for the frenzy essentially to household political clashes. Some censured Jackson for declining to restore the contract of the Bank, bringing about the withdrawal of government reserves from the bank. Martin Van Buren, who progressed toward becoming president in March 1837, was to a great extent reprimanded for the frenzy despite the fact that his initiation went into the frenzy by just five weeks. Van Buren's refusal to utilize government intercession to deliver the emergency as indicated by his adversaries contributed further to the hardship and term of the dejection that took after the frenzy. Jacksonian Democrats, then again, faulted the National Bank, both in subsidizing uncontrolled hypothesis and in presenting inflationary paper cash. Current market analysts, for the most part, see Van Buren's deregulatory financial strategy as effective in the long haul for its significance in renewing banks after the frenzy</span>
