Answer: Politics in some parts of the colonies oscillated, and social movements that opposed slavery emerged.
Explanation:
It is essential to point out at the outset that the slave policy in the South and North was different. The south was entirely dependent on the slave labour, while in the north the slaves were in somewhat better conditions. However, when we talk about the north of More specifically New England, there were some oscillations in the colony. New England freed more and more slaves from year to year, primarily because of the fact that they were involved in the war. The colonial government in Rhode Island, which is an integral part of New England, sought to maintain a somewhat more rigid position on slaves, but all went towards freeing these people. Specific religious-social movements also emerged, which, by invoking moral principles, sought to eliminate slavery.
<span>
if direct democracy means (pure) democracy then it means that every
citizen would get a chance to vote on issues instead of what we have in
the US: a representative democracy where we vote in politicians to do it
for us. A pure democracy would lead to civil war most likely b/c too
many people would be able to disagree, anarchy would be a likely
result,....so i would say D is your answer </span>
I don't know, Tariff, Levy, Toll?
Answer:
Religions and belief systems have been both a unifying force and a dividing force in world history is explained below in details.
Explanation:
Religion is an important perspective of culture: it can unit people, but it can also divide people. Most important religions originated in one separate area and expanded over time.
Religion is uniting because they present a combination of people to believe in a related thing. Black, white, brown, yellow, it doesn't value because they could all assume in the same situation. It is also apparently the most divisive subject on land due to everyone thinking that they are correct and others are incorrect which is where the Christians, Hindu, and Muslims usually end up clashing with each other even though all three religions are similar.
Answer:
Social – The social conditions in France in the late 18th century were remarkably unequal and exploitative. The clergy and the nobility formed the first two Estates and were the most privileged classes in French society. They were excluded from the payment of taxes to the State. On the other hand, the Third Estate that consisted of peasants and workers formed the majority of the population. They were charged with excessive taxes with no political and social rights. As a result, they were extremely discontent.
Economic – As a result of numerous wars waged by Louis XVI the State coffers were empty. The situation was made even more complex by France’s involvement in the American War of Independence and the faulty system of taxation. While the privileged classes were excused from paying taxes the Third Estate was more and more burdened with them.
Political – The Bourbon king of France, Louis XVI was an extremely autocratic and weak-willed king who led a life of obscene luxury. This led to a lot of disenchantment among the masses who then were leading life of extreme poverty and widespread hunger.
Intellectual – The 18th century was marked by a conscious refusal by French thinkers of the ‘Divine Rights Theory’. Philosophers like Rousseau rejected the paradigm of absolute monarchy and promulgated the doctrine of equality of man and sovereignty of people. They played a pivotal role in exposing the fault lines of the old political system, i.e. the ancien regime, and articulating the popular discontent.
