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
jarptica [38.1K]
3 years ago
8

PLSS HELP THIS DUE TODAY!! I WILL GIVE YOU BRAINLYEST!!

History
1 answer:
Sindrei [870]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

Freedom rights are seen in the picture below

Explanation:

You might be interested in
How did Presidential addresses and Supreme Court rulings begin to change the lives of the American people starting from the mid-
Salsk061 [2.6K]
<span>For starters, technology developed and now a lot more people could hear these adresses and see them on TV and hear them through the radio and they could be recorded and studied. The Supreme court decisions were important because they decided what would happen to people and their rights. For example, the supreme court first decided that separate but equal was a good doctrine, but later they decided it was unconstitutional. The addresses could affect public opinion to support something that the congress didn't want, and the supreme court would act on behalf of the people.</span>
4 0
4 years ago
Alexander Hamilton Believed that creation of the bank of the united states would help the nation’s economy by
Lemur [1.5K]
It’s D, providing for a stable currency
3 0
3 years ago
In the myth of the "Self-Made Man", what did business tycoons claim their success was simply the result of? What was the actual
True [87]

Answer:

The Self-Made Myth exposes the false claim that business success is the result of heroic individual effort with little or no outside help. Brian Miller and Mike Lapham bust the myth and present profiles of business leaders who recognize the public investments and supports that made their success possible—including Warren Buffett, Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry’s, New Belgium Brewing CEO Kim Jordan, and others. The book also thoroughly demolishes the claims of supposedly self-made individuals such as Donald Trump and Ross Perot. How we view the creation of wealth and individual success is critical because it shapes our choices on taxes, regulation, public investments in schools and infrastructure, CEO pay, and more. It takes a village to raise a business—it’s time to recognize that fact.

This book challenges a central myth that underlies today’s antigovernment rhetoric: that an individual’s success is the result of gumption and hard work alone. Miller and Lapham clearly show that personal success is closely tied to the supports society provides.

Explanation:

it’s worth mentioning briefly an additional impact that the self-made myth has on our public debates—that of people voting their aspirations. Because the rags-to-riches myth persists, many Americans hold on to the belief, however unlikely, that they too may one day become wealthy. This has at times led to people’s voting their aspirations rather than their reality. As Michael Moore noted in 2003:

After fleecing the American public and destroying the American Dream for most working people, how is it that, instead of being drawn and quartered and hung at dawn at the city gates, the rich got a big wet kiss from Congress in the form of a record tax break, and no one says a word? How can that be? I think it’s because we’re still addicted to the Horatio Alger fantasy drug. Despite all the damage and all the evidence to the contrary, the average American still wants to hang on to this belief that maybe, just maybe, he or she (mostly he) just might make it big after all.35

It is essential that we find a more honest and complete narrative of wealth creation. In chapter 2, we expose the fallacy of the self-made myth by examining the stories of individuals often lifted up as successes in our public dialogues. In examining their stories, we come to better understand that even their business success includes contributions from society, from government, from other individuals, and even luck.

Beyond the moralizing ridiculed by Twain, this individual success myth overlooked a number of key social and environmental factors. The emergence of a clear geography of opportunity showed that there was something about the place where one lived that contributed to one’s success. No matter what personal qualities someone had, if you lived in Appalachia or the South, your chances of ascending the ladder to great wealth were slim. Those who achieved great wealth were almost invariably from the bustling industrial cities of the Northeast. By one estimate, three out of four millionaires in the nineteenth century were from New England, New York, or Pennsylvania.7

Another unique external factor was the opportunity that existed at that time, thanks to expanding frontiers and seemingly unlimited natural resources. The United States was conquering and expropriating land from native people and distributing it to railroads, White homesteaders, and land barons. Most of the major Gilded Age fortunes were tied to cornering a market and exploiting natural resources such as minerals, oil, and timber. Even P. T. Barnum, the celebrated purveyor of individual success aphorisms, had to admit in Art of Money Getting that “in the United States, where we have more land than people, it is not at all difficult for persons in good health to make money.”8

He might have added that it also helped to be male, to be free rather than a slave, and to be White. While free Blacks had some rights in the North, they had little opportunity to achieve the rags-to-riches dream because of both informal and legal discrimination. Even after the Civil War, Blacks, Asians, and others were largely excluded from governmental programs like the Homestead Act that distributed an astounding 10 percent of all US lands—270 million acres—to 1.6 million primarily White homesteaders.9

5 0
3 years ago
The Vietnamese led independence movements against the
Brums [2.3K]

The correct answer to this question is the Chinese.

<em>It is true that the Vietnamese lead independent movements against the Chinese.</em>

The first China invasion of Vietnam was in 111BCE. The Han Dynasty conquered Nam Viet. The second time China controlled Vietnam was in 618. The Tang Dynasty expanded its dominions so far and it reached Vietnam. The Chinese transmitted its philosophy, art, and poetry to the Vietnamese. In 938, Ngo Quyen led the Vietnamese Independence. So, it’s true that the Vietnamese lead independent movements against China.

5 0
3 years ago
(MC)
Alina [70]

Answer:

I think its the answer is D

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • explain what you think might cause a person to become as dedicated to a cause as Mao Tse-tung and Chiang Kai-shek were dedicated
    15·1 answer
  • When the president is opposed to a bill passed by Congress, he may reject it and return it to Congress. This action is called a(
    14·2 answers
  • Why did the us refused to let the st louis dock in the us?
    5·1 answer
  • What was integral to the spread of Enlightenment from Europe to America?
    12·2 answers
  • Which of the following best describes why most Northern men joined the fight against the South?
    9·2 answers
  • Write a one- to two-paragraph essay that answers the following question:
    10·1 answer
  • Why did the United States is chemical warfare during the Vietnam war
    8·2 answers
  • The
    13·1 answer
  • What was an effect of the rise of the middle class in the sung period?<br> ANSWER QUICK PLS
    11·2 answers
  • What was an outcome of the wars for independence in latin america?
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!