The united states where worried that japan would give military support to the european countrys
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Non-violent resistance can be successful because it is a powerful way to show discontent to any injustice or support to another valid issue, conveying the message that violence is no need to unite people against the support of a common cause. Non-violent demonstrations and protests have demonstrated to be so powerful to make changes in different places of the world.
The examples of non-violent resistance that you have learned about are the cases of Mahatma Gandhi, the pacifist leader in India, who was the first to use non-violent demonstrations. Another good example would be Dr- Martin Luther King Jr, who supported non-violent demonstrations such as the March to Washington.
The issue that I feel non-violent resistance could encounter and limit success is that people cannot defend themselves in the case of police aggression or other types of aggression, such as another group who favor violence to stop those pacifist demonstrations.
Answer:
The first choice is correct
Explanation:
Got it right
Answer:
Caesar's Civil War resulted from the long political subversion of the Roman Government's institutions, which began with the career of Tiberius Gracchus, continuing with the Marian reforms of the legions, the bloody dictatorship of Lucius Cornelius Sulla, and completed by the First Triumvirate over Rome.
Explanation:
Answer:
he proceeded to narrate some of the facts in his own history as a slave, and in the course of his speech gave utterance to many noble thoughts and thrilling reflections. As soon as he had taken his seat, filled with hope and admiration, I rose, and declared that PATRICK HENRY, of revolutionary fame, never made a speech more eloquent in the cause of liberty, than the one we had just listened to from the lips of that hunted fugitive. So I believed at that time,--such is my belief now. I reminded the audience of the peril which surrounded this self-emancipated young man at the North, --even in Massachusetts, on the soil of the Pilgrim Fathers, among the descendants of revolutionary sires; and I appealed to them, whether they would ever allow him to be carried back into slavery,--law or no law, constitution or no constitution. The response was unanimous and in thunder-tones--"NO!" "Will you succor and protect him as a brother-man--a resident of the old Bay State?" "YES!" shouted the whole mass, with an energy so startling, that the ruthless tyrants south of Mason and Dixon's line might almost have heard the mighty burst of feeling, and recognized it as the pledge of an invincible determination, on the part of those who gave it, never to betray him that wanders, but to hide the outcast, and firmly to abide the consequences.
Explanation:
