Is it fair to claim that powers like Britain, France, and Belgium got a raw deal during imperialism?

History

1 answer:

goblinko [34]3 years ago

8 0

The statement is TRUE.

Old imperialism was characterized by direct occupation and dominance of a territory, and started with the arrival of the Spanish to America leaded by Columbus in 1492. Colonized territories depended on their mother country for political, economic, social and cultural issues. Apart from Spain, also other countries such as France, UK or Belgium created their own empires.

The relationships established with the colonist were mostly profitable for the mother country, specially in economic terms. Such system allowed the mother country to consume raw materials, minerals and other resources from the colonies only paying for the costs of their obtention or extraction, and to use them to produce manufactures. Subsequently, they traded the final products in the international markets, becoming powerful exporting nations. They even sold those final products back in the colonies.

You might be interested in

During the 1880s and 1890s, which mode of transportation gave mobility and reliability to those living in rural areas?

rosijanka [135]

I think its trains but it also might be cars. I dont imagine there would be cars in rural areas. So probably Trains. If I’m wrong, please correct.

8 0

3 years ago

Lincoln promised the South that he would not interfere with slavery where it already existed.

S_A_V [24]

False. He ended slavery everywhere after the 13th and 14th amendment was wrote. After the civil war.

3 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Which is the term used for the legislative branch setting aside or reversing a decision?

Yakvenalex [24]

It's called "override"

5 0

3 years ago

42-51 how does Chisholms use of repetition and her use of loaded language contribute to the persuasive power of the speech? Supp

Inessa05 [86]

Answer:

idk

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

"In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases

Llana [10]

Answer:

They would cite the fourteenth amendment, which states that the prohibition of interracial marriages is prohibited and does not cite same-sex marriages.

Explanation:

The text shown in the question above refers to the right that the constitution of persons who have been legally married within the country. Thus, if a homosexual couple has been legally married, no state can prevent them from enjoying the conjugal rights that the constitution allows. However, those who oppose this type of thinking claim that the constitution does not support or protect same-sex marriages, and these marriages are unconstitutional, since the fourteenth amendment, which refers to marriages, only covers interracial and does not, at any time, cite homosexual marriages.

6 0

2 years ago