1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Serjik [45]
3 years ago
7

I will make u a brainlist!!

History
1 answer:
OverLord2011 [107]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

\boxed {\boxed {\sf C. \ The \ Bill \ of \ Rights}}

Explanation

When the new Constitution was developing in the late 1700s, there were 2 groups: the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

Both groups knew the current form of government, the Articles of Confederation, was failing. However, the Federalists crafted an entirely new Constitution, but the Anti-Federalists just wanted amendments and revisions to the Articles.

The Articles resulted in a weak and decentralized government. The Anti-Federalists wanted this and stronger state governments. The representatives from these states refused to ratify unless a <u>Bill of Rights </u>was added. This would protect the people's rights in case a leader became too powerful.

You might be interested in
Explain MacMillan's conclusion that Wilson "remained a Southerner in some ways all his life." Describe how Wilson's background a
Murljashka [212]

Answer:

paki basa nalng .

Explanation:

On December 4, 1918, the George Washington sailed out of New York with the American delegation to the Peace Conference on board. Guns fired salutes, crowds along the waterfront cheered, tugboats hooted and Army planes and dirigibles circled overhead. Robert Lansing, the American secretary of state, released carrier pigeons with messages to his relatives about his deep hope for a lasting peace. The ship, a former German passenger liner, slid out past the Statue of Liberty to the Atlantic, where an escort of destroyers and battleships stood by to accompany it and its cargo of heavy expectations to Europe.

On board were the best available experts, combed out of the universities and the government; crates of reference materials and special studies; the French and Italian ambassadors to the United States; and Woodrow Wilson. No other American president had ever gone to Europe while in office. His opponents accused him of breaking the Constitution; even his supporters felt he might be unwise. Would he lose his great moral authority by getting down to the hurly-burly of negotiations? Wilson's own view was clear: the making of the peace was as important as the winning of the war. He owed it to the peoples of Europe, who were crying out for a better world. He owed it to the American servicemen. "It is now my duty," he told a pensive Congress just before he left, "to play my full part in making good what they gave their life's blood to obtain." A British diplomat was more cynical; Wilson, he said, was drawn to Paris "as a debutante is entranced by the prospect of her first ball."

Wilson expected, he wrote to his great friend Edward House, who was already in Europe, that he would stay only to arrange the main outlines of the peace settlements. It was not likely that he would remain for the formal Peace Conference with the enemy. He was wrong. The preliminary conference turned, without anyone's intending it, into the final one, and Wilson stayed for most of the crucial six months between January and June 1919. The question of whether or not he should have gone to Paris, which exercised so many of his contemporaries, now seems unimportant. From Franklin Roosevelt at Yalta to Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton at Camp David, American presidents have sat down to draw borders and hammer out peace agreements. Wilson had set the conditions for the armistices which ended the Great War. Why should he not make the peace as well?

Although he had not started out in 1912 as a foreign policy president, circumstances and his own progressive political principles had drawn him outward. Like many of his compatriots, he had come to see the Great War as a struggle between the forces of democracy, however imperfectly represented by Britain and France, and those of reaction and militarism, represented all too well by Germany and Austria-Hungary. Germany's sack of Belgium, its unrestricted submarine warfare and its audacity in attempting to entice Mexico into waging war on the United States had pushed Wilson and American public opinion toward the Allies. When Russia had a democratic revolution in February 1917, one of the last reservations that the Allies included an autocracy vanished. Although he had campaigned in 1916 on a platform of keeping the country neutral, Wilson brought the United States into the war in April 1917. He was convinced that he was doing the right thing. This was important to the son of a Presbyterian minister, who shared his father's deep religious conviction, if not his calling.

Wilson was born in Virginia in 1856, just before the Civil War. Although he remained a Southerner in some ways all his life in his insistence on honor and his paternalistic attitudes toward women and blacks he also accepted the war's outcome. Abraham Lincoln was one of his great heroes, along with Edmund Burke and William Gladstone. The young Wilson was at once highly idealistic and intensely ambitious. After four very happy years at Princeton and an unhappy stint as a lawyer, he found his first career in teaching and writing. By 1890 he was back at Princeton, a star member of the faculty. In 1902 he became its president, supported virtually unanimously by the trustees, faculty and students.

6 0
3 years ago
Why does sen Hammond believe slaves exist in the North as well as the south? Who are these “slaves”?
asambeis [7]

North is better than south. idk im trying to get points man.

5 0
4 years ago
Putting the needs of your family first is a main idea of what philosophy?
sp2606 [1]

Answer:

B. Confucianism

Explanation:

Confucius described the virtue of humaneness as exemplified by an adult's protective feelings for a child which basically meant taking care of family.

6 0
3 years ago
Which of the following are three causes that led to the decline of the Old Kingdom?
notsponge [240]
Your answers are E,B. hope this helps
3 0
3 years ago
What was a result from the McCulloch vs Maryland
Lina20 [59]

As a result from McCulloch vs Maryland, two very important consequences aroused. First, the doctrine of the "implied powers" , understanding that the Constitution grants said implied powers to the Congress to implement the express powers. Secondly, that no state action can interfere with valid constitutional exercise of power by the federal government.

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which of the following advantages did the colonists have during the
    10·1 answer
  • What hardships did american soldiers face in world war 1?
    12·1 answer
  • • A source of raw materials to produce goods
    8·1 answer
  • What qualities did they both possess? What injustices did they both face?
    15·1 answer
  • What european colonies were taken by japan in asia
    14·1 answer
  • Which major event sparked the need for Imperialism?<br> Your answer
    15·2 answers
  • In no more than 3 sentences, describe how the<br> Church was the center of Medieval communities.
    6·1 answer
  • One cause of the Great Depression was a decrease in the demand for goods. Around 1928, demand for new housing decreased. This le
    5·1 answer
  • Select the correct answer. Matt dreams of becoming an astronaut. Which Air Force command should he aim to join? OA. Air Combat C
    6·1 answer
  • What group of Americans did most of the fighting in Vietnam?
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!