Nationalism heightened in the 19th century and heading into the 20th century. The nationalistic fervor by people in Europe had them each viewing their own nations as better than the others, in competition with the others. This would lead to an increase in tension between the nations.
Imperialism expanded on that nationalistic rivalry by carrying their competition to other parts of the globe. The nations of Europe sought to grab control for themselves over parts of Asia and Africa. When war erupted, that also meant it would become a world war because the European nations would include people from their imperial territories in the war.
Militarism grew ever more potent as the 20th century opened. The competition between nations included a massive arms race in terms of expanding armies and navies. The nations also sided up in competing military alliances and made military battle plans as to how they might fight a war if war came. When a cause for war broke out, all those preparations propelled the nations of Europe into war recklessly.
Answer:
To begin with, Colonel John Bradstreet starts his statement off by calling the American Indians "savages", the "less useful, and "greatest villains". You can infer that Bradstreet does not like or want a relationship with the American Indians at all. In his statement he emphasizes how the Indians are defenseless, and that they are raising jealousy. I can tell that Bradstreet does not like the encounters with the Indians, nor think they are helpful people. Williams Johnson starts his statement off with saying that the colonist had the wrong idea about the Indians and that they " greatly dispised them" without even knowing their power or knowledge of these lands. He wanted a bond with the Indians that were beneficial; he also believed that the Indians had their own way of living and that they were useful.
The two perceptions are completely different. Bradstreet has a negative perception of the Indians the whole throughout the whole statement. He believes that the Indians are not a ally, but more of an enemy. Johnson on the other hand believes that the colonist hasn't gave the Indians a chance to show them their knowledge. He also believes that the Indians could be allies, and not enemy's.
Explanation:
On Edge 2020.
John of Leiden, was an Anabaptist leader from Leiden, in the Holy Roman Empire's County of Holland.
Answer:
<u>President Hoover</u> A.K.A <u>Herbert Hoover</u>
Explanation:
Before serving as America's 31st President from 1929 to 1933, Herbert Hoover had achieved international success as a mining engineer and worldwide gratitude as “The Great Humanitarian” who fed war-torn Europe during and after World War I.
B is the right answer. All of the other options would show a decrease in the emphasis on knowledge and education.
