The North was mainly an urban society in which people held jobs.
The South was primarily an agricultural society in which people lived in small villages and on farms and plantations.
Because of their cultural differences, people of the North and South found it difficult to agree on social and political issues.
The North was a manufacturing region, and its people favored tariffs that protected factory owners and workers from foreign competition.
Southerners opposed tariffs that would cause prices of manufactured goods to increase. Planters were also concerned that England might stop buying cotton from the South if tariffs were added.
While there were several differences between the North and the South, the issues related to slavery increasingly divided the nation and led to the Civil War.
A major conflict was states’ rights versus strong central government.
Answer:
no
Explanation:
you never commit acts of violence against another person regardless of who it is.
One of the main ways in which the policies of Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin were similar is that they all sought to avoid nuclear war with the west--knowing that engaging in such a conflict would no doubt lead to their utter destruction.
Preventing genocide is one of the greatest challenges facing the international community.[1]<span> Aside from the suffering and grief inflicted upon generations of people and the catastrophic social, economic and political dislocations that follow, this ‘crime of crimes’ has the potential to destabilize entire regions for decades (Bosco, 2005). The shockwaves of Rwanda’s genocide are still felt in the eastern parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo nearly 20 years later, for example. Considerable resources are now devoted to the task of preventing genocide. In 2004 the United Nations established the Office of the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide with the purpose to ‘raise awareness of the causes and dynamics of genocide, to alert relevant actors where there is a risk of genocide, and to advocate and mobilize for appropriate action’ (UN 2012). At the 2005 World Summit governments pledged that where states were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect their populations from ‘war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity’ the international community could step in a protect those populations itself (UN, 2012). The ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) project, designed to move the concept of state sovereignty away from an absolute right of non-intervention to a moral charge of shielding the welfare of domestic populations, is now embedded in international law (Evans 2008). Just this year, the United States government has stated that ‘preventing mass atrocities and genocide is a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States,’ and that ‘President Obama has made the prevention of atrocities a key focus of this Administration’s foreign policy’ (Auschwitz Institute, 2012). Numerous scholars and non-government organisations have similarly made preventing genocide their primary focus (Albright and Cohen, 2008; Genocide Watch, 2012).</span>
