D. <span><span>
his defense of the rights of Native American to their land</span></span>
They would first make a community of the other farmers and other people who donates most of the money for the community building will be the head and the second most will be the second idk what to call him and they would do something and talks for the panchayat
Answer:
Generally, white power structures responded to the Civil Rights Movement based on their geographic location. Thus, most southerners spoke out against this movement, while most northerners supported the cause. This situation was even transversal to the Democratic and Republican parties, since for example Lyndon Johnson, Democratic President who approved the Civil Rights Act in 1964, supported the movement while Orval Faubus, Governor of Arkansas for the same party, did not do so in absolute.
In general, the governors and mayors of the south of the country did everything possible to prevent the advancement and achievements of this movement, through imprisonment (such as in Birmingham, where Martin Luther King was imprisoned), police repression and various government restrictions.
In contrast, northern politicians and those in Washington generally had a more open and responsive stance, supporting the movement and believing in equal opportunities.
Answer:
Crowded and unsafe living conditions.
Explanation:
Most immigrants in the early 1800s would probably be very poor, especially after spending the money to travel to an entirely new country. Most immigrants were probably escaping from corrupt governments, looking for religious freedom, or simply wanting a fresh start. They mostly travelled in big groups, either families or neighbors or small communities, and because of this, their housing was probably cramped, run down, and very quickly and poorly built to account for this influx of new people pouring into the US.
Answer:
The National Party was elected in 1948 on the policy of Apartheid ('separateness'). This 'separateness' put South Africans of different racial groups on their own paths in a partitioned system of development.
Explanation:
<h3>Effects of the Group Areas Act</h3>
The GAA had strange implications for governance and responsibility as it became more elaborate and amended. For example, the Coloured townships of Coronationville, Noordgesig, Newclare, Riverlea, and Western Township are administrated by Johannesburg City Council while Bosmont is the responsibility of the Department of Community Development (South African Institute of Race Relations, 1964: 216). The work of welfare organizations was made more difficult by the GAA, like Lunalegwaba House, a group home for African boys, in Johannesburg could not operate because the regulations of the GAA did not allow the White charity to own the property (South African Institute for Race Relations, 1967: 306). People attempted to use the courts to overturn the GAA, though each time they were unsuccessful (Dugard, 1978, 324). Others decided to use civil disobedience and other protests, like ‘sit-ins’ at restaurants, were experienced across South Africa in the early 60s. The 'sit-ins' were not ill-received by the average White citizen, which the South African Institute of Race Relations believed proved that they did not object to sharing restaurants with the other racial groups (1961: 183). There was also resistance from Cape Town City Council who voted before 1964 to keep District Six and the central business district not dedicated to any one racial group; they had the support of the Cape Town Chamber of Commerce on this decision (South African Institute of Race Relations, 1964: 213).
