The aim of this question is to have you weigh the evidence and decide which title best fits the 1920s and be ready to defend your choice.
This sort of question is not one which has just one correct response. The detailed instructions for the discussion question already give you the outlines of the arguments for both sides of the question. The value of the discussion activity is to get you to think about the factors on both sides of the discussion and to talk through those ideas as a class.
One possible answer to the question would be to say that both titles fit the 1920s equally well, but they look at the era from differing perspectives. From the standpoint of mainstream politics (headed by Presidents Harding and Coolidge), the 1920s represented a return to isolationist and conservative policies, with government focused on making the country a good place for business and industry. From the standpoint of social life and trends, there was much liberalism and freedom being expressed, which went against the conservative mainstream mood of those who held political power at the time.
Statistical data relating to the population and groups within it. U know you could've just googled this?
Answer:
Due to the Versailles treaty, Germany was forced to pay incredibly sizeable reparations to France and Great Britain. In addition, the Versailles treaty, which many agreed was far too harsh, forced Germany to give up thirteen percent of its land. At first Germany tried to recover from the war by way of social spending.
Explanation:
hope this helps
The framers of the US Constitution were worried about keeping a balance between the power of the presidency and the power of the other branches of the federal government.
This is evident from the fact that the Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances. This ensures that the legislative and judicial branch have the ability to regulate the presidents power. This fear of a strong central leader stemmed from America's experience as part of the British Empire. After seeing how King George III abused his power, the framers wanted to make sure that this would not happen again.
Answer:True
Explanation:
In "Enemies of Conservation" author Mark Dowie argued that when biologists and environmentalists think about the issue of biodiversity they often don't include the indigenous people that have lived in the region for thousands of years. AS mentioned in enemies of conservation we also see that conservation biologists argue that by allowing native populations to grow, hunt, and gather in protected areas, anthropologists, cultural preservationists, and other supporters of indigenous rights become complicit in the decline of biological diversity.
