Technically, no. Hitler himself was not elected at all. But the Nazi party achieved some degree of electoral success, leading ultimately to Hitler's appointment as chancellor.
I support Andrew Jackson's claim which states that the Indian Removal was done in the best interests of American Indians.
The indian removal of the United States to Individual States brough several benefits, such as:
- It put an end to a possible <u>danger of collision.</u>
- It <u>allowed states to grow</u> rapidly in wealth, power and population, which reinforced the southwestern border.
In addition, the indian removal to the native americans contributed to:
- <u>Release the Indians</u> of the power of the state.
- Enabled them to <u>maintain their way of life</u> (culture, traditions, language, etc).
As Jackson quoted himself "The removal was necessary because the <u>Native Americans would be annihilated</u>".
Answer:
Algonquian
Explanation:
Soon after the first Europeans set foot in Northern America they encountered tribes of Native Americans. The tribes that were initially contacted were from the Algonquian group of Native Americans. The Europeans though used the term Powhatan for all of them, despite the Powhatan just being part of them. This group of Native Americans lived mostly in Northern Carolina and Virginia, and were people that were engaged in agriculture and had settled lifestyle. They were actually very helpful to the Europeans as they were the ones that helped them survive throughout he winters and thought them how to grow the native crops, but that lasted for short time and things escalated between the two unfortunately.
The Britain economy was steady while the United States had failed to solve their problems.
A political and social center for African American artists and philosophers
