Answer:
The Republican Party was formed in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
Explanation:
The Kansas-Nebraska Act was the law enacted in the United States, in 1854, for the creation of the states of Nebraska and Kansas, in territories of former French Louisiana.
The situation of the two states north of the line defined in the Missouri Compromise meant that both should be states in which slavery was not allowed. However, the contiguity of Kansas with the slave state of Missouri and the search by Senator Douglas for southern support for a railroad in his state (Illinois) caused the law to include the provision that, in order to decide on the issue of slaves, citizens could exercise "popular sovereignty" and, therefore, be able to decide whether to be a slave state or not.
The discussion of the law and subsequent voting provoked strong conflicts between anti-slavery and pro-slavery, especially in Kansas, and the disappearance of the Whig party (divided between supporters of the law in the south and those opposed to it in the north), and the creation of the Republican Party. To the new party were incorporated, in addition to the most determined anti-slavery, those who opposed the expansion of slavery, although accepting it in a certain way, limiting its existence to the states where it already existed. That position against slavery, although not abolitionist, allowed the Republican Party to be the dominant force in the north, and not lose all the southern vote, and that its candidate, Abraham Lincoln, won the presidential election in 1860.
Answer: Havana Harbor, when the USS Maine was attacked by explosion 1898. This war only lasted 10 weeks
Explanation:
The Harlem Reinaissance was a cultural, intellectual and social movement developed in the decade of the 1920s in New York. It importance relies on the fact that it was considered the rebirth of African American cultural expressions. The so-called negro culture acquired great popularity.
Through the movement, African Americans who participated on it felt empowered again after a very long time, and found the strength to fight against constant discriminations and racist manifestations in everyday life.
<h2><u>Answer:</u></h2>
Serfs were the laborers of lowest levels in many zones of medieval Europe, however, in some, there were slaves, who were at a lower level. Serfs were not slaves but rather were not allowed to leave the land where they worked.
Their commitment with their medieval master was shared; he had commitments to them, to give a place and ensure them, similarly as they had commitments to him, to give a piece of the product, or later, cash for lease. Serfs couldn't be purchased or sold.
They had a place with the land, not the ruler. In the event that the master sold the land, they ran with it. The new proprietor did not have the alternative of moving them off the land.
