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
Gnesinka [82]
3 years ago
9

Can someone help me with this I’ll give you 10 points

History
1 answer:
barxatty [35]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

The historical circumstance that led to this development was the European exploration and their desire for raw materials that eventually led to Imperialism.

i have no idea if its the answer i still have to catch up with my maps hehehe

You might be interested in
Was the colonial outrage over boston massacre justified explain
hram777 [196]
No, the colonists started the thing by being jer ks and throwing snowballs and other things toward the British soldiers
8 0
3 years ago
What conclusion can you draw about the position of Attorney General?
IrinaK [193]

Attorney general is the head of the Department of Justice and chief legal counsel to the president. The duties of the attorney general are very important and wide spreading. The attorney general mainly handles the cases that involves government and give advice to President and head of the executive body when needed.

Explanation:

The post of Attorney General was created in 1789 to head the chief judiciary system and law enforcement department in federal government. In the territory or state Attorney General is the top legal advisor. They act and behave in the legislation as a people's representative. Attorney generals are elected by members, some are directly appointed by governor.

U.S senate confirms the attorney general but they are nominated by president. The attorney general handles the cases where government is involved and gives advice to president and head executive whenever needed.

8 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

5 0
1 year ago
16. How did the State Colonization Law of 1825 change Texas during the Mexican National era?
Makovka662 [10]

Answer:

It increased the population by offering cheap land.

Explanation:

During the nineteenth century, Texas was part of Mexico. However, very few Mexicans lived there, since it was very far from the central areas of Mexico. This allowed the Comanche to control vast areas of the state, making life even harder for the few Mexican colonists.

The government of Mexico decided to populate the state with people from the U.S., and it passed the State Colonization Law of 1825, which allowed White Americans from the U.S. to settle in Texas as long as they did not bring slaves with them (slaves was forbidden in all of Mexico).

This policy was successful in bringing more people to the state, but it also set the stage for the future independence and posterior annexation of Texas to the United States.

8 0
3 years ago
Analyze the relationship between religion and reform in the decades from 1800 to 1860. Why did many religious people feel compel
lilavasa [31]

Answer:

Explanation:

Between 1820 and 1860 there was rapid expansion and great arguments about the morality and validity of slavery. The Second Great Awakening filled a greater Protestant religion into American society and culture. It was the religious people's responsibility to improve the morality of American society to achieve God's mission. Americans were successful at imposing reforms on society in the form of abolitionism, women's rights, and the reform of certain forms of moral vice, such as prostitution and alcoholism. However, and sadly, no reforms were entirely successful. I think that some parallels exist today because of the moral reform movement to stop violence and sexual behavior in the media, and Anti-Abortion believers who argue for an increase in human morality to meet the expectations of the Christian moral tradition.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Who created a vast network of roads to link the empire? A. Aztec B. Maya C. Inca
    11·2 answers
  • Identify a feature of each religion.
    7·2 answers
  • Sea-faring people renowned for their glassware
    6·1 answer
  • The necessary and proper clause in article 1 section 8 of the constitution gives Congress _____ powers
    8·2 answers
  • Identify a reason Americans would have
    11·1 answer
  • Diseases brought by explorers
    9·2 answers
  • TIMED Why might the bulding of the Erie Canal be considered controversial?
    7·2 answers
  • What were the military restructions imposed over Germany by the treaty of versailles??​
    9·1 answer
  • ) What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with Jefferson? Why?
    10·2 answers
  • Mirabeau lamar was appointed by sam houston to plan the new capitol city , true or false
    15·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!