<span>The Nazis prevalent in Germany called themselves as national socialists whereby they also are considered as fascists. Meanwhile, Russia was a nation of communists. The Italian and German fascists did not agree with the Russian communists, hence World war II has occured. Answer is b.</span>
Answer:
Although all this is true the outcomes were different because the American Revolution was mainly focused on gaining independence while the French revolutions The common people of France wanted to get rid of the French monarchy, the lower classes wanted to enforce equality rather than having the nobles and the king ...
Explanation:
I hope it's help
I believe the answer is: c. Americans feared that other foreign powers would gain power if the United States did not get involved.
At that time, the soviet union was known to give military aid to Cuban revolutionaries against the Spanish government. United States see this as a threat that might spread communism influence to south America, so they decided to also get involved in the revolutionary.
I believe the answer is Wheat farming, i hope this helped
Historian Frederick Merk says this concept was born out of "a sense of mission to redeem the Old World by high example ... generated by the potentialities of a new earth for building a new heaven".[4]
Historians have emphasized that "manifest destiny" was a contested concept—pre-civil war Democrats endorsed the idea but many prominent Americans (such as Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and most Whigs) rejected it. Historian Daniel Walker Howe writes, "American imperialism did not represent an American consensus; it provoked bitter dissent within the national polity ... Whigs saw America's moral mission as one of democratic example rather than one of conquest."[5]
Newspaper editor John O'Sullivan is generally credited with coining the term manifest destiny in 1845 to describe the essence of this mindset, which was a rhetorical tone;[6] however, the unsigned editorial titled "Annexation" in which it first appeared was arguably written by journalist and annexation advocate Jane Cazneau.[7] The term was used by Democrats in the 1840s to justify the war with Mexico and it was also used to divide half of Oregon with the United Kingdom. But manifest destiny always limped along because of its internal limitations and the issue of slavery, says Merk. It never became a national priority. By 1843 John Quincy Adams, originally a major supporter of the concept underlying manifest destiny, had changed his mind and repudiated expansionism because it meant the expansion of slavery in Texas.
