Nationalism usually does provoke violence and rebellions within nations. A great example of such a thing was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Bosnian Serb due to the fact he was a major Serbian Nationalist and believe Bosnia should be apart of Serbia.
A. A price floor is set above price equilibrium.
B. Quantity demanded is less than Quantity supplied
C. Quantity supplied exceeds Quantity demanded
A. When a price ceiling is set below the equilibrium price
B. Quantity demanded exceeds Quantity supplied
C. Quantity supplied is less than quantity demanded
<span>Great Britain and France, two European powers with a vested interest in following what occurred during the American Civil War. Britain and France each watched, followed, and responded to the events of the Civil War in a manner that best served their own interests. Let's learn more about this fascinating international story.
France and the Civil War
Between these two countries, France played a much smaller role in the American Civil War. France maintained that it was officially neutral during the conflict, yet parts of the country sympathized with the Confederacy, mostly because of the need for Southern cotton. The Union blockade restricted the flow of Southern cotton, forcing some French textile manufacturers to lay off workers, hurting their business severely.
Furthermore, French Emperor Napoleon III had a desire to spread his rule into parts of Mexico, something which the Confederacy would have been able to assist with. Thus, Napoleon III had something to gain from a Confederate victory in the war. Others in France sympathized with the Union, primarily, because of their hatred of slavery in the American South.
The Confederacy did send diplomats to France to encourage assistance in the South's cause. Men such as John Slidell, a leading Confederate diplomat to France, attempted to convince France to recognize the Confederacy as an independent nation as well as to arrange for loans and assistance for the Confederate cause. While France never officially recognized the Confederacy, some French capitalists did assist the South by providing loans and financial assistance.
Britain and the Civil War
While France never truly had an impact in the Civil War, Great Britain played a larger role in the conflict. Like France, Britain remained officially neutral throughout the war, but that did not stop the country from finding ways to make its presence known.
Many in the government of Great Britain, such as Prime Minister Viscount Palmerston, the head of the British government during the Civil War, leaned toward recognizing the Confederacy despite Britain's stated neutrality. Both sides still tried to sway Palmerston and his government. The Union government sent leading ambassador and diplomat Charles Francis Adams Sr. to Britain to persuade the country to maintain its neutrality, while the South sent several different diplomats. The most prominent Confederate diplomat sent to Britain was James Mason, who worked hard to convince the British to recognize the Confederacy. In September 1862, Palmerston and his administration were on the verge of recognizing the Confederacy, but the Union victory at Antietam convinced them otherwise. Through the rest of the war, Britain would remain neutral.</span>
Answer:
The answer is A.
all the other answers are sus
For people in the modern world, there may be nothing more difficult to comprehend than the group calling itself the Islamic State, or ISIS. The beheadings, rapes, and other acts of cruelty seem beyond understanding, as does the wanton destruction of priceless ancient monuments. Perhaps most mystifying of all is the way ISIS has been able to recruit young men — and even some young women — from the industrialized West, particularly Europe: the conventional wisdom is that the cure for ethnic and religious violence is “development,” education, and the opportunities provided by free markets. This seems not to be the case.
Because of the mainstream media’s narrow and often misplaced focus, it’s not surprising that most Westerners believe that religious extremism is primarily a problem of Islam. But the fighting in Syria and Iraq is not the only ethnic or religious conflict underway. There has been violence between Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka, Buddhists and Hindus in Bhutan, Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab, Eritreans and Ethiopians in the Horn of Africa, Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda, ethnic Russians and Ukrainians in the former Soviet Union, and many more. The fact is, fanaticism, fundamentalism, and ethnic conflict have been growing for many decades—and not just in the Islamic world.
Failure to recognize this trend can lead to the belief that terrorism is a product of nothing more than religious extremism and will end when secular market-based democracies are established throughout the world. Unfortunately the reality is far more complex, and unless we address the underlying causes of conflict and terrorism, a more peaceful and secure future will remain elusive.
To really understand the rise of religious fundamentalism and ethnic conflict we need to look at the deep impacts of the global consumer culture on living cultures throughout the planet. Doing so allows us not only to better understand ISIS and similar groups, but also to see a way forward that lessens violence on all sides.
I hope this Helps...
