Answer:
I'm not sure if this is 100% true, but its probably because slaves had less harsh daily work compared to other slaves because of their connection to the slave owner or if they were lighter skinned. I heard that light skinned slaves were better treated(but still suffered of course) but had less harsh works and were sent to clean the houses. I'm not 100% sure about this though
Explanation:
<span>Charlemagne provided people with such an improvement: <span> He revived education. He realized that in order to get qualified workers and to develop nation as whole the society must be educated. Therefore, he established schools around some churches and gave people a possibility for self development.</span></span>
Answer:
A major difference between the two is that Herbert Hoover was much less interventionist than Roosevelt, intervenionist meaning a person who believes the state should intervene the economy in order to fix it, instead of leaving all economic solutions to the market alone.
Hervert Hoover only reluctantly applied some interventionist policies to try to end the Great Depression: for example, signing the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1929 which allowed the reduction of crop surpluses that were a cause of farmer's economic ruin. But beyond a few other measures, there's not much else to his presidency. He did not even end Prohibiton for example.
FDR on the other hand, gave a lot more power to the state. He implemented a series of reforms known as the New Deal, with the aim of ending the Great Depression. He also ended Prohibition, and led the country during World War II.
In general terms, most historians coincide that Roosevelt was a much better president than Herbert Hoover.
