Answer:
people believe in so many gods which is Not smart when there only one..Dont worry about the buddah statues its all full of non sense
Explanation:
Answer:
ionic
Explanation:
covalent shares electrons
ionic gives or takes electrons (anions and cations)
also this is a chem question :)
i have not the slightest clue wat u have done
One negative about the slave trade was that it tended to increase the amount of war that occurred in West Africa. The reason for this is that European (and American) slave traders did not simply go out into the African countryside and kidnap their own slaves. Instead, they bought slaves from the coastal kingdoms. Those kingdoms generally got slaves to sell through war and through raids against inland tribes. Because the slave traders wanted more slaves, the coastal kingdoms were encouraged to wage more wars and conduct more raids against their neighbors. In addition, those kingdoms were provided with things like guns in exchange for slaves. This helped those kingdoms have a greater capacity for waging war.
This brings us to the one (short-term) benefit of the slave trade: it initially helped the coastal kingdoms. Those kingdoms became richer and more powerful because they were able to get guns, money, and other things in exchange for the slaves.
However, even these kingdoms were hurt in the long term. This is because the slave trade hurt all of West Africa. First, the slave trade took away millions of Africans (men more than women) in the prime of their lives. This badly disrupted both the cultures and the economies of the African nations. Because they were disrupted, they were less able to progress. The link below argues that the slave trade made it harder for Africa to enjoy an agrarian revolution and, in turn, an industrial revolution. This is because the men and women who could have helped make these revolutions were being taken into slavery. Because the African nations did not develop economically and because their societies were weakened, they were unable to effectively resist the Europeans when the Europeans started to colonize Africa.
Thus, we can say that Africa was badly harmed by the slave trade. The trade made war more common, harmed the economies and societies of the nations from which the slaves came, and eventually made it easier for Africa to be colonized by the Europeans.
This is in my opinion one of the aspects that makes the central courts and the different lines of thought within a single subject so interesting. The clash of ideas that we have in this case is a perfect example.
- On one side we have those who look at the current 30 million uninsured Americans, which include millions in Texas, and the undeniable success it had in Massachusetts. Most of them conclude that this mandate is a government success.
- On the other hand, we can find those who believe that this is a terrible invasion of the government to the citizen's free will to choose their own healthcare options, they see government overreach, and at the same time an unprecedented intrusion on individual liberties to which there is no justification.
Unfortunately this is something that millions of Americans have been forced into. It's evident how they refused to create a public health care system, and instead give more power to the private sector.
After this short debate of ideas, I will give you one question to ponder on: Which principle is more important? Your freedom, your civil liberties, and your freedom from the government line of thought, or the possibilty of providing health care to millions of uninsured Americans?
I hope this solves your question!
Happy 2019! :)
