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
MrRa [10]
3 years ago
14

Is there anyone in your life that you trust completely

History
1 answer:
crimeas [40]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Philosophically,i would say that people may say they trust somebody completely or with all their heart, but their brain may still have restraints or concerns on the truth of telling somebody, even if they are the most trustworthy person you may know. However, trust is also non-materialistic so it is up to you to decide you trust anybody 'completely'

Explanation:

You might be interested in
United states physicist who directed the project at los alamos that developed the first atomic bomb
vodomira [7]

Robert Oppenheimer was the United states physicist who directed the project at Los Alamos that developed the first atomic bomb.

6 0
3 years ago
The current Democratic and Republican parties would disagree on the answer to which question?
Ahat [919]
The correct answer is b and d
3 0
3 years ago
Brainliest reward
ozzi
Hello! The answer to this is C. Transition.

Because the definition of transition is 'the process of changing from one state to another.'

Hope this helps! ☺♥
6 0
3 years ago
Which greek gods are correctly paried with their roles select all correct answers
shutvik [7]

Answer:

-Ares

-Aphrodite

Explanation:

Ares is known as the Greek god of war.

Aphrodite is known as the Greek goddess of beauty and love.

Athena is known as the Greek goddess of war and wisdom, not peace and learning.

Pericles was not a god at all.

8 0
2 years ago
What were andrew johnson policies concerning the rights of African Americans?
Lelu [443]

for the most part, historians view Andrew Johnson as the worst possible person to have served as President at the end of the American Civil War. Because of his gross incompetence in federal office and his incredible miscalculation of the extent of public support for his policies, Johnson is judged as a great failure in making a satisfying and just peace. He is viewed to have been a rigid, dictatorial racist who was unable to compromise or to accept a political reality at odds with his own ideas. Instead of forging a compromise between Radical Republicans and moderates, his actions united the opposition against him. His bullheaded opposition to the Freedmen's Bureau Bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and the Fourteenth Amendment eliminated all hope of using presidential authority to affect further compromises favorable to his position. In the end, Johnson did more to extend the period of national strife than he did to heal the wounds of war.

Most importantly, Johnson's strong commitment to obstructing political and civil rights for blacks is principally responsible for the failure of Reconstruction to solve the race problem in the South and perhaps in America as well. Johnson's decision to support the return of the prewar social and economic system—except for slavery—cut short any hope of a redistribution of land to the freed people or a more far-reaching reform program in the South.

Historians naturally wonder what might have happened had Lincoln, a genius at political compromise and perhaps the most effective leader to ever serve as President, lived. Would African Americans have obtained more effective guarantees of their civil rights? Would Lincoln have better completed what one historian calls the "unfinished revolution" in racial justice and equality begun by the Civil War? Almost all historians believe that the outcome would have been far different under Lincoln's leadership.

Among historians, supporters of Johnson are few in recent years. However, from the 1870s to around the time of World War II, Johnson enjoyed high regard as a strong-willed President who took the courageous high ground in challenging Congress's unconstitutional usurpation of presidential authority. In this view, much out of vogue today, Johnson is seen to have been motivated by a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution and by a firm belief in the separation of powers. This perspective reflected a generation of historians who were critical of Republican policy and skeptical of the viability of racial equality as a national policy. Even here, however, apologists for Johnson acknowledge his inability to effectively deal with congressional challenges due to his personal limitations as a leader.

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • The articles of confederation represented the Americans distrust of
    13·2 answers
  • Stephen Douglas’s proposed Kansas-Nebraska Act: Group of answer choices
    7·1 answer
  • Lawrence Kohlberg believed an individual’s moral behavior was an outcome of one’s current stage of cognitive development. true o
    7·1 answer
  • Which is the best example of a requirement passed to keep African Americans from voting in the Jim Crow era?
    5·2 answers
  • Explain how the relationship between state and local governments demonstrates the principles of federalism.
    15·1 answer
  • Which best describes military strategy during World War I?​
    10·1 answer
  • Can some one pls do this eassy for me
    10·1 answer
  • What post-war issues in Europe led to a series of "velvet revolutions" to allow Cold War socialist nations to choose self-determ
    5·1 answer
  • Based on the map, which of the following European countries had the greatest colonial presence in Central Africa?
    14·2 answers
  • ⚠️PLEASE HELP!!⚠️ Compared with the North, the South had many more____.
    14·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!