<span>Unify diverse people and bring greater efficiency and control.</span>
Answer:
Yes. But only on the land that wasn't pre-occupied by the native.
Explanation:
The vast majority of the land in North America at the time was inhabited. Coming to this territory to form farms and towns would not bother any particularly group of people.
The creation for farms and towns itself wasn't immoral.
But, doing so while taking the ancestral land of the locals and forced them to moved away or kill them is considered as 'immoral'. There were plenty of space that hey can occupied without doing so.
Border ruffians contributed to the "bleeding Kansas" problem by actively terrorizing citizens of the free state. The Border ruffians came from the slave state of Missouri and in an attempt to change attitudes through force, they would actively terrorize opponents to their pro-slavery stance. The "bleeding Kansas" problem occurred as is was decided around the time of 1950 that the settlers themselves would choose whether Kansas was a free or slave state. This resulted in a flood of people from both sides rushing to settle Kansas in order to gain another state that aligned with their particular values. The period lasted until about 1959-60 and animosity persisted through the civil war.
The answer would probably be the “Freedom Riders”, who challenged segregation on public transportation throughout the South.
If you are using edgenuity, the answer is "moral wrong"
