Answer
British East India Company. It turns out, that India was never originally colonized by the British crown, but by a multinational company (MNC). Robert Clive, who won the Battle Of Palashi (‘Plassey’ for ‘Hey bear, ek gin and tonic idaar!’ folks), was an employee (‘Team Leader’ in 21st-century terms) of the world’s first public limited company. (Britons had equity stakes and to make favorable trading deals, the company ended up having an army.)That hired army ended up ousting the weak-by-then Mughals and accidentally ended up with a nation. Ours. Yes, a large company, so influential and powerful, that it made laws of another nation. The modern equivalent would be if, say, Coca-Cola removed the Chinese premier and started running it. It’s unheard of, mad. But that’s what happened, and that is how I am writing this column in English and you’re reading it in English, both parties pretending as we folks have always been English speakers and writers. All because a bunch of company middle management wanted to protect their investments and threaten some nabobs for their tea and silk and spice and opium trade. And the company’s armies also meted out their version of justice. This begs the question: can a company do that? Today, if you visit the dockland area of London from where the East India Company ships once sailed, hundreds a day to rule Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, there’s a wildlife reserve, a jogging track, an indoor concert hall called the O2 Arena, a bunch of suburban high-rises that look a bit like Whitefield in Bengaluru, and an HSBC call center. Zero signs that it was once the epicenter of the imperial world, ruling 3/4th of the planet with trade.
Answer:
I believe is B. both were set up to prevent the spread of communism
Explanation:
In the United States, the three main factors that make up the system of checks and balances would be the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch, since the goal is to separate these powers so that no single power becomes too powerful.
I"m not really sure but i think the answer is C.
Answer:
The Loyalists were as socially diverse as their Patriot opponents but some groups produced more Loyalists. ... Some escaped slaves became Loyalists. They fought for the British not out of loyalty to the Crown, but from a desire for freedom, which the British promised them in return for their military service.
Explanation:
