........................

Phantasy [73]

Answer:

There was a contested election but Adams won.

Explanation:

Differences about domestic and international politics led to a contested election in 1796 with Adams being elected President.

7 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

How did slave labor during to the Punic Wars affect small farmers? It hurt them because large farms who used slaves as laborers

iris [78.8K]

Slave labor during to the Punic Wars affected small farmers in that: It hurt them because large farms who used slaves as laborers could sell products cheaper.

<h3>What were the Punic Wars?</h3>

The Punic Wars were a series of wars that were fought between the Roman empire and the Ancient Carthage between 264 and 146 BC.

These wars had a terrible effect on the farmers who were threatened by the larger farms. When the competition became severe for them, they gave up their farms and went to the cities.

Learn more about the Punic Wars here:

brainly.com/question/9108214

7 0

2 years ago

HELP

torisob [31]

Answer:

At the start of the twentieth century there were approximately 250,000 Native Americans in the USA – just 0.3 per cent of the population – most living on reservations where they exercised a limited degree of self-government. During the course of the nineteenth century they had been deprived of much of their land by forced removal westwards, by a succession of treaties (which were often not honoured by the white authorities) and by military defeat by the USA as it expanded its control over the American West.

In 1831 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall, had attempted to define their status. He declared that Indian tribes were ‘domestic dependent nations’ whose ‘relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian’. Marshall was, in effect, recognising that America’s Indians are unique in that, unlike any other minority, they are both separate nations and part of the United States. This helps to explain why relations between the federal government and the Native Americans have been so troubled. A guardian prepares his ward for adult independence, and so Marshall’s judgement implies that US policy should aim to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream US culture. But a guardian also protects and nurtures a ward until adulthood is achieved, and therefore Marshall also suggests that the federal government has a special obligation to care for its Native American population. As a result, federal policy towards Native Americans has lurched back and forth, sometimes aiming for assimilation and, at other times, recognising its responsibility for assisting Indian development.

What complicates the story further is that (again, unlike other minorities seeking recognition of their civil rights) Indians have possessed some valuable reservation land and resources over which white Americans have cast envious eyes. Much of this was subsequently lost and, as a result, the history of Native Americans is often presented as a morality tale. White Americans, headed by the federal government, were the ‘bad guys’, cheating Indians out of their land and resources. Native Americans were the ‘good guys’, attempting to maintain a traditional way of life much more in harmony with nature and the environment than the rampant capitalism of white America, but powerless to defend their interests. Only twice, according to this narrative, did the federal government redeem itself: firstly during the Indian New Deal from 1933 to 1945, and secondly in the final decades of the century when Congress belatedly attempted to redress some Native American grievances.

There is a lot of truth in this summary, but it is also simplistic. There is no doubt that Native Americans suffered enormously at the hands of white Americans, but federal Indian policy was shaped as much by paternalism, however misguided, as by white greed. Nor were Indians simply passive victims of white Americans’ actions. Their responses to federal policies, white Americans’ actions and the fundamental economic, social and political changes of the twentieth century were varied and divisive. These tensions and cross-currents are clearly evident in the history of the Indian New Deal and the policy of termination that replaced it in the late 1940s and 1950s. Native American history in the mid-twentieth century was much more than a simple story of good and evil, and it raises important questions (still unanswered today) about the status of Native Americans in modern US society.

Explanation:

Plz give me brainliest worked hard

8 0

3 years ago

Put the ancient Mesopotamian rulers in order from past to present (chronologically)

jeka57 [31]

333 BC - Alexander the Great invades the land and conquers the Persian Empire.

480 BC - Xerxes I tries to conquer the Greeks with a huge army. He is eventually turned back in defeat.

490 BC - Darius I attacks the Greeks. He is defeated at the Battle of Marathon.

518 BC - Darius I establishes the capital of the Persian Empire at Persepolis.

522 BC - Darius I becomes King of Persia. He expands the empire and divides it up into states each ruled by a governor called a satrap.

539 BC - Cyrus the Great takes the city of Babylon and lets the Jewish people return to Israel.

550 BC - Cyrus the Great rises to power and the Persian Empire begins.

604 BC - Nabopolassar dies and Nebuchadnezzar II becomes King of Babylon. He will rule for 43 years and bring the Babylonian Empire to its peak.

616 BC - Nabopolassar takes control of Babylon back from the Assyrians and crowns himself king. The neo-Babylonian empire begins.

626 BC - Ashurbanipal dies and Assyria begins to crumble.

668 BC - Ashurbanipal becomes the last great King of Assyria. He establishes a great library in the city of Nineveh.

705 BC - Sargon II dies and Sennacherib becomes king. He moves the capital to Nineveh.

709 BC - Sargon II takes control of the city of Babylon.

721 BC - King Sargon II takes control of Assyria. The empire grows stronger.

744 BC - The Assyrian Empire becomes strong once again under the rule of Tiglath-Piliser III.

1077 BC - Tiglath-Piliser dies and the Assyrian Empire becomes weaker for a time.

1115 BC - The Second Assyrian Empire reaches its peak under the rule of King Tiglath-Piliser I.

1250 BC - The Assyrians begin to use iron weapons and chariots.

1225 BC - The Assyrians capture Babylon.

1360 BC - The Assyrians once again rise in power.

1595 BC - The Kassites take the city of Babylon.

1750 BC - Hammurabi dies and the First Babylonian Empire begins to fall apart.

1781 BC - King Shamshi-Adad of the Assyrians dies. The First Assyrian Empire is soon taken over by the Babylonians.

1792 BC - Hammurabi becomes king of Babylon. He establishes the Code of Hammurabi and Babylon soon takes over much of Mesopotamia.

1900 BC - The Assyrians rise to power in northern Mesopotamia.

2000 BC - The Elamites capture Ur.

2100 BC - After the Akkadian Empire crumbles, the Sumerians once again gain power. The city of Ur is rebuilt.

2330 BC - Sargon I of the Akkadians conquers most of the Sumerian city states and creates the world's first empire, the Akkadian Empire.

2250 BC - King Naram-Sin of the Akkadians expands the empire to its largest state. He will rule for 50 years.

2400 BC - The Sumerian language is replaced by the Akkadian language as the primary spoken language in Mesopotamia.

2700 BC - The famous Sumerian King Gilgamesh rules the city-state of Ur.

3000 BC - The Sumerians start to implement mathematics using a number system with the base 60.

3200 BC - The Sumerians begin to use the wheel on vehicles.

3300 BC - The Sumerians invent the first writing. They use pictures for words and inscribe them on clay tablets.

3500 BC - Much of lower Mesopotamia is inhabited by numerous Sumer city-states such as Ur, Uruk, Eridu, Kish, Lagash, and Nippur.

4000 BC - The Sumer establish powerful city-states building large ziggurats at the center of their cities as temples to their gods.

5000 BC - The Sumer form the first towns and cities. They use irrigation to farm large areas of land.

8 0

3 years ago

Economic sanctions are mainly used to

kondor19780726 [428]

The correct answer is: "To force a certain country to change an undesired behaviour"

Economic and trade sanctions are common mechanisms in international affairs. They are imposed by a country or group of countries and they set a penalty on imported products from one or more other nations.

Sanctions aim to force the punished nations to change their behaviour or policies on a certain issue, by limiting their ability to trade with the nation(s) that has(have) imposed the sanction and, in turn, they negatively influence their economic growth opportunities. For example, the US imposes a sanction aiming to force a country to respect human rights by abolishing child labor.

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers