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
Dmitry_Shevchenko [17]
2 years ago
8

What resource was important to each Native American group

History
1 answer:
Phantasy [73]2 years ago
6 0

Answer:

The most important resource for each Native American group such as Northeast Woodland Indians and Northwest Coast tribes is trees. The trees are their source of food such as plums and cherries, they used it to carved weapons or tools out of wood, and it is also an important source of materials for their shelter and to build canoes for livelihood and travel.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
How did the fall of the berlin wall affect the US foreign policy<br><br> PLEASE HELP
Korolek [52]

Answer:

Some  outcomes of the fall of the Berlin Wall were the end of travel restrictions for East Germans, a sudden increase of East Germans moving to the West, and the change from a planned economy to a free market.

3 0
3 years ago
What is not a reason given in the article as to why the Soviet Union continuing to gain power was a problem for the United State
fenix001 [56]

Answer:

<em>Hello There Again. the correct Answer B. </em><u><em>Soviet Union seeks to spread a "fanatic" belief in communism, which is opposite the beliefs of the United States.</em></u>

Explanation:

Because The concept of "socialism in one country" was conceived by Stalin in his struggle against Leon Trotsky and his concept of permanent revolution. In 1924, Trotsky published his pamphlet Lessons of October in which he stated that socialism in the Soviet Union would fail because of the backward state of economic development unless a world revolution began. Stalin responded to Trotsky's pamphlet with his article, "October and Comrade Trotsky's Theory of Permanent Revolution". In it, Stalin stated, that he did not believe an inevitable conflict between the working class and the peasants would take place, further adding that "socialism in one country is completely possible and probable". Stalin held the view common amongst most Bolsheviks at the time; there was possibility of real success for socialism in the Soviet Union despite the country's backwardness and international isolation. While Grigoriy Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev and Nikolai Bukharin, together with Stalin, opposed Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution, they diverged on how socialism could be built. According to Bukharin, Zinoviev and Kamenev supported the resolution of the 14th Conference (held in 1925) which stated that "we cannot complete the building of socialism due to our technological backwardness." Despite the rather cynical attitude, Zinoviev and Kamenev did believe that a defective form of socialism could be constructed. At the 14th Conference, Stalin reiterated his position, claiming that socialism in one country was feasible despite the capitalist blockade of the country. After the conference, Stalin wrote "Concerning the Results of the XIV Conference of the RCP(b)", in which he stated that the peasantry would not turn against the socialist system because he believed they had a self-interest in preserving.[43] The contradictions which would arise with the peasantry during the socialist transition, Stalin surmised, could "be overcome by our own efforts". He concluded that the only viable threat to socialism in the Soviet Union was a military intervention.

In late 1925, Stalin received a letter from a party official which stated that his position of "Socialism in One Country" was in contradiction with Friedrich Engels own writings on the subject. Stalin countered, stating that Engels' writings 'reflected' "the era of pre-monopoly capitalism, the pre-imperialist era when there were not yet the conditions of an uneven, abrupt development of the capitalist countries." From 1925 onwards, Bukharin began writing extensively on the subject, and in 1926, Stalin wrote On Questions of Leninism, which contained his best-known writings on the subject. Trotsky, with the publishing of Leninism, began countering Bukharin's and Stalin's arguments, claiming that socialism in one country was possible, but only in the short-run, and claimed that without a world revolution it would be impossible to safeguard the Soviet Union from the "restoration of bourgeoisie relations". Zinoviev on the other hand, disagreed with both Trotsky and Bukharin and Stalin, holding instead steadfast to Lenin's own position from 1917 to 1922, and continued to claim that only a defecting form of socialism could be constructed in the Soviet Union without a world revolution. Bukharin, by now, began arguing for the creation of an autarkic economic model, while Trotsky, in contrast, claimed that the Soviet Union had to participate in the international division of labour to develop. In contrast to Trotsky and Bukharin, Stalin did not believe a world revolution was possible, claiming in 1938 that a world revolution was in fact impossible, and claiming that Engels was wrong on the matter. At the 18th Congress, Stalin took the theory to its inevitable conclusion, claiming that the communist mode of production could be conceived in one country. He rationalised this by claiming that the state could exist in a communist society, as long as the Soviet Union was encircled by capitalism. However, surprisingly, with the establishment of socialist regimes in Eastern Europe, Stalin claimed that socialism in one country was only possible in a large country like the Soviet Union, and that the other states, in order to survive, had to follow the Soviet line.

6 0
3 years ago
Why is Rizal called to be a KRISTONG TAGALOG or Tagalog Christ?
olga2289 [7]

Answer:

It was Miguel de Unamuno , spanish philosopher and writer who characterizedRizals execution as spanish disgrace and who , in 1970 was the first to call Rizal's the Tagalog Christmas.

4 0
2 years ago
What the Magna Carta led to the creation of parliament, England’s?
Mice21 [21]

The Magna Carta lead to the creation of the English Parliament, as well as the House of Commons and the House of Lords, if I recall correctly. Hope that helped.

5 0
3 years ago
Study Image A and Image B closely. Then answer the following questions in one to three sentences. Part A In your own words, desc
Snowcat [4.5K]

Okay so in your statement, it says what printing technology is being used in this image, so look at it very closely and answer it, and if you truly need the help post the screenshot of it so I can really help you from there if not I think the image is pretty straight forward.

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Identify a word that means opposite of secede
    10·1 answer
  • El arco de medio punto – planta de cruz griega – destaca la orfebrería
    9·1 answer
  • In the late 1800s, the French Empire spread throughout most of Europe. took over North America. conquered parts of southern Asia
    6·1 answer
  • Under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle, what government was formed? a. Maquis c. Vichy b. Free French d. Nazi
    7·1 answer
  • How was president Lincoln able to change the meaning of War by issuing the emancipation proclamation
    15·2 answers
  • 2. Why was Opium so important to the Chinese government
    14·1 answer
  • Which statements about the reign of louis 14 are true
    13·1 answer
  • It has to be a page long.
    14·1 answer
  • Plss help me with this history work
    7·1 answer
  • How did Charles Perkins make an impact on the history of the current generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!