By pardcadan c)bati edebiyarindan
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>".
Can you show the whole screen?
The difference between tenant farmers and sharecroppers is:
B) Tenant Farmers owned the crops, animals and tools while sharecroppers owned nothing.
Sharecroppers had to borrow everything they needed.
ANSWER: B
Hope this helps! :)
The major Atlantic slave trading nations, ordered by trade volume, were: the Portuguese<span>, the </span>British<span>, the </span>French<span>, the </span>Spanish<span>, and the </span>Dutch Empire. Several had established outposts on the African coast where they purchased slaves from local African leaders.[5]These slaves were managed by a factor who was established on or near the coast to expedite the shipping of slaves to the New World. Slaves were kept in a factory while awaiting shipment. Current estimates are that about 12 million Africans were shipped across the Atlantic,[6]<span> although the number purchased by the traders is considerably higher, as the passage had a high death rate.</span>[7][8]<span> Near the beginning of the nineteenth century, various governments acted to ban the trade, although illegal smuggling still occurred. In the early twenty-first century, several governments issued apologies for the transatlantic slave trade.</span>
