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
fiasKO [112]
3 years ago
5

Why was it hard to achieve equal education in the 1950s?​

History
2 answers:
Svet_ta [14]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

<h3><em>No</em><em> </em><em>in</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>1</em><em>9</em><em>5</em><em>0</em><em>'</em><em>s</em><em> </em><em>it</em><em> </em><em>was</em><em> </em><em>easy</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>achieve</em><em> </em><em>equal</em><em> </em><em>education</em></h3>
Ray Of Light [21]3 years ago
5 0

Explanation:

it is when there still was racism and white and blacks where separated and had different type of education based on there skin color

You might be interested in
Who is the author of Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet? A. Francis Drake B. Sir Walter Raleigh C. Edmund Spenser D. William Shakespear
34kurt
That would be D. William Shakespeare
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why do people support the Right to Bear Arms amendment?
EleoNora [17]

Answer:

Explanation:Modern debates about the Second Amendment have focused on whether it protects a private right of individuals to keep and bear arms, or a right that can be exercised only through militia organizations like the National Guard. This question, however, was not even raised until long after the Bill of Rights was adopted.

Many in the Founding generation believed that governments are prone to use soldiers to oppress the people. English history suggested that this risk could be controlled by permitting the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or other emergencies, the government could rely on a militia that consisted of ordinary civilians who supplied their own weapons and received some part-time, unpaid military training.

The onset of war does not always allow time to raise and train an army, and the Revolutionary War showed that militia forces could not be relied on for national defense. The Constitutional Convention therefore decided that the federal government should have almost unfettered authority to establish peacetime standing armies and to regulate the militia.

This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that the proposed Constitution would take from the states their principal means of defense against federal usurpation. The Federalists responded that fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the American people were armed and would be almost impossible to subdue through military force.

Implicit in the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions. First, that the proposed new Constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and militia. Second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression.

The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution. Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion.

Much has changed since 1791. The traditional militia fell into desuetude, and state-based militia organizations were eventually incorporated into the federal military structure. The nation’s military establishment has become enormously more powerful than eighteenth century armies. We still hear political rhetoric about federal tyranny, but most Americans do not fear the nation’s armed forces and virtually no one thinks that an armed populace could defeat those forces in battle. Furthermore, eighteenth century civilians routinely kept at home the very same weapons they would need if called to serve in the militia, while modern soldiers are equipped with weapons that differ significantly from those generally thought appropriate for civilian uses. Civilians no longer expect to use their household weapons for militia duty, although they still keep and bear arms to defend against common criminals (as well as for hunting and other forms of recreation).

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
1) Which of the following statements best describes the spread of Islam under the first four caliphs?
vova2212 [387]
The correct answer for 1 is
<span>b. Arabs united under Islam and defeated nearby empires.
Arabs lived in numerous tribes and these tribes were often at war with surrounding people due to various reasons. They decided to united under the banner of Islam to fight and spread their kingdom and religion and this proved to be highly successful.

The correct answer for 2 is </span>
<span>b. weakened Persian and Byzantine rule and
</span><span>c. daring, effective fighting methods
Their armies used technology and strategy that was not common at the time which made them superior to their opponents. The Persian and Byzantine empires were weakened because they were constantly at wars with others and with themselves and this made it easy for Umayyads to rise.

The correct answer for 3 is
</span><span>d. The Umayyads expanded into Spain
When they conquered the entire Northern Africa region they crossed the Gibraltar and entered the Iberian peninsula. This was a crucial thing for the area because Islam became a big thing and Hebrews, Muslims, and Christians lived in the area until the Spanish inquisition decided to end that.</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was true about President Johnson’s attitude toward Vietnam?
frutty [35]

Answer:

D. He had been against American involvement before becoming president.

Explanation: just saying it might be wrong

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
A criminological theory attempt to explain
Lilit [14]
Why do people commit crimes? From misdemeanors to violent felonies, some individuals step in to the criminal justice system and learn their lesson to never commit a crime again.  Others unfortunately become repeat offenders with a never ending rap sheet.  Environment obviously plays a huge role but it is only one of many factors. The study of crime<span> and why some people can’t get away from it while others never have even a speeding ticket has been dissected for decades.</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • PLLLLLZZZZ HELP I AM GIVING 50 POINTS AND I AM GIVING BRAINLIEST!!!!!!
    11·2 answers
  • How did the Maya civilization government and social classes impact their culture and daily lives?
    10·1 answer
  • True or False: Before the advent of OSHA, a cohesive system of separate rules existed that effectively governed the American wor
    11·2 answers
  • Can you write 5 evidence with their explanations about American Ideals?
    8·1 answer
  • Why was the tea act of 1773 passed ? A) to benefit the east India company. B) to provide financial aid to the colonists. C) to u
    14·2 answers
  • What contributed to rapid economic growth in England during the Industrial Revolution?
    14·2 answers
  • Following the Neolithic Revolution, a group of people gormed a farming community along the Euphrates River. Which of the followi
    6·2 answers
  • Which one of these was a preacher during the enlightenment period
    12·2 answers
  • How was communism differnt from capitalism
    9·1 answer
  • What did the spanish hope to gain from columbus voyage?
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!