President Howard Taft had failed to continue his policies of progressive rights of <span>suffrage on women, the direct election of U.S. senators, a decreased tariff and a host of social reforms</span>
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there are no options attached we can say the following.
The Indian fight for independence from the British empire received such strong support not only in India but from other countries, for teh fact that its leader, Mahatma Gandhi, decided to base the Indian Independence movement on non-violent acts.
So we can say that a big part of the success of the movement was due to the non-violence approach and tactics of its leaders.
As happened in the past, if a violent approach would have been taken, the English king could easily have sent soldiers and special troops to quickly ending with any fight or rebellion. So Gandhi really knew that a war was not a real option and many Indians could have died on the battlefield with not a real chance of winning the war.
So the nonviolent approach was the smartest decision he could have made.
It premiered cultural division, and it also increased trade among other civilisations, allowing them to expand possibilities, as well as spreading culture from china to Europe.
Leif Eriksson! :)
Hope this helped :)
<span>The workers of the agricultural sector had different reactions to the industrial revolution that agriculture had as part of the new technological and agrarian contributions that were developed in the 19th century. A part of the farmers was uncomfortable with new changes and adaptation of new trends and methods of work because they knew their old methods well and were comfortable with them. Other farmers were happy and satisfied with the new technologies for agriculture and acquired new knowledge and training to develop agriculture. There was a debate between both ideas and opinions by the workers.</span>
