All categories

3 years ago

"how effective were native americans in overcoming the negative aspects of european policies"

1 answer:

6 0

The native Americans were either not effective at all or the effects were on a short term while trying to overcome the negative aspects for them from the European policies. This is due to few reasons:

- Not organized; most of the tribes were functioning individually and were rarely making alliances (usually small ones), but never came to a situation to fully organize themselves and to stand up to the Europeans. Not to mention the fact that lots of tribes collaborated with the Europeans at the expense of the other tribes.

- Quickly outnumbered; because of death caused by war and diseases, and the ever increasing number of new settlers from Europe, the native Americans were outnumbered in a very short space of time, so they lost their only advantage.

- Technologically and military disadvantaged; Europeans were much more technologically and military advanced than the native Americans, so whenever they were not willing to collaborate and listen to their orders, the Europeans used violence and force, and most of the time managed to sort out things in their interest very quickly and efficiently, and the native populations were not able to stop them.

You might be interested in

“The necessities of our altered relationship to the Pacific Ocean [after the late 1840s] found expression in a comprehensive tre

Elodia [21]

Answer:

░░░░░▐▀█▀▌░░░░▀█▄░░░

░░░░░▐█▄█▌░░░░░░▀█▄░░

░░░░░░▀▄▀░░░▄▄▄▄▄▀▀░░

░░░░▄▄▄██▀▀▀▀░░░░░░░

░░░█▀▄▄▄█░▀▀░░

░░░▌░▄▄▄▐▌▀▀▀░░ This is Bob

▄░▐░░░▄▄░█░▀▀ ░░

▀█▌░░░▄░▀█▀░▀ ░░ Copy And Paste Him In Brainly Question,

░░░░░░░▄▄▐▌▄▄░░░ So, He Can Take

░░░░░░░▀███▀█░▄░░ Over Brainly

Explanation:

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Hiiiiiii helppp me in this especially number 3 .Rewrite it to make it true if false and if true just write true.

kiruha [24]

The correct answer for 1 is false. After the French defeat, the lands became British and Britain imposed new rules on how to deal with Natives. These rules were not friendly and the Native Americans were highly dissatisfied because the French were often friendly to the Natives and worked together with them

The correct answer for 2 is true. The land where the Natives lived belonged to France. Frenchmen didn't bother them and kept the relations positive. When France lost and Britain got the territories, British soldiers inhabited the land and started bothering the locals which rose tensions.

The correct answer for 3 is false. The Native American tribes that worked together failed to kick out the British armies from the lands. However, they did compel them to change their policies regarding trade and behavior on the lands which means that it was a sort of a stale mate.

The correct answer for 4 is true. The proclamation forbade the colonists from going westwards. This caused a lot of anger because they wanted to spread more westwards since they wanted more land for themselves. This proclamation was important because it established borders for living in the colonies.

The correct answer for 5 is false. The colonists were unhappy. They wanted to go more westwards and get new land and establish new colonies. They believed that the king had no right to restrict their movement since it was forbidden by law to go westwards.

3 0

3 years ago

Brainliest for whoever answers quickest and correctly

Black_prince [1.1K]

Answer:

1. D

2. A

3. C

4. The Democratic Party is making a serious blunder in criticizing President Roosevelt’s foreign policy .

There can result nothing but praise and admiration for the President’s policy.

Explanation:

In 1902, the European forces announced blockage on Venezuela due to the country’s rejection to resolve foreign debts. In consequence, the Roosevelt Corollary came into force.

In 1904, the US president Theodore Roosevelt put in force the Roosevelt Corollary, an extension to the Monroe doctrine. It assured the protection of the US over the countries of Latin America and its intervention in foreign affairs regarding the European countries.

The US had made it clear that they were a force to fear and Theodore Roosevelt was aware of that. They were an established military force as had been proven by its great victory against Spain in 1898.

This was what was pre-required for Roosevelt to exercise his Big Stick policy: the country had to have proven capable to strike, but peaceful and willing to negotiate at a time. It seemed to work as Germany decided to back off on Venezuelan blockage after the US intervention.

Before the completion of the Panama Canal, the US trade route was incredibly long and devastating. On top, the perishable goods would have spoiled during the (at least) three-month-long trip.

The Panama Canal facilitated all of that. The US boats had a significantly shorter route to take, the former time was cut and it allowed faster shipping, lower fuel costs, and therefore – more trade.

The Democratic Party is making a serious blunder in criticizing President Roosevelt’s foreign policy

In this sentence, it is the word blunder that suggests the writer’s attitude on the matter. A blunder is a stupid mistake committed out of ignorance. The use of this type of word originates from a subjective point of view.

There can result nothing but praise and admiration for the President’s policy.

The author of the text is clearly taking sides, as he assures that there is only one possible way to think of the President Roosevelt’s policy: nothing but praise and admiration.

7 0

3 years ago

Revolution is a dynamic process with consequences no one can anticipate. Explain the initial goals of the colonists in 1765, at

Umnica [9.8K]

Although to them it seemed that these ideas would help them break away from

5 0

3 years ago

The belief that a state had the right to nullify federal laws, secede from the Union, and decide whether to allow slavery in the

tino4ka555 [31]

Answer:

Answer: Nullification

Explanation:

Not sure tho

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers