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
AveGali [126]
2 years ago
6

How were returning african-american soldiers treated in american cities in 1919–1920?.

History
1 answer:
mamaluj [8]2 years ago
8 0

After returning there were several cases of racist attacks against these african-american soldiers by other white soldiers.

Also during red summer mass violence and mob violence occurred and over the course of 3 days hundreds of black people we killed.

So to be honest there was a lot of racism and segregation was still present.

You might be interested in
HELPPPPPPP ASAP
OLga [1]

Answer:

b

Explanation:

The bill was signed by the president polk on December 29th.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Bolivia is crossed by the equator. Is this true or false? Thanks!
laila [671]
Bolivia is not crossed by the equator, so it's false
7 0
3 years ago
Which action best illustrates Mohandas Gandhi's concept of civil disobedience?
crimeas [40]
<span>B) Citizens in the United States went to jail for violating segregation laws.
 
Gandhi advocated for a new non-confrontational technique of protest where the citizenry would desist from acts of violence. whenever violence broke out, Gandhi would control it by refusing to eat. By disobeying the segregation laws, the citizens basically refused to disobey the civil racial laws and were sent to jail without any bloodbath from the police. It denies those in power justifications for atrocities.
</span>
7 0
3 years ago
For a large part of the 20th century, only a small part of the population in South Africa had a say in the government. Certain r
Stella [2.4K]
Yes, oligarchy fits as a description of South African government under the system of apartheid.  In the political philosophy of Aristotle, "aristocracy" is "rule by the excellent ones," and in certain eras of history or in some societies, one group or another has been portrayed as more "excellent" and thus more favorable for serving as governors.  In Aristotle's political thought, an "oligarchy" or "rule by a few" is a corruption of the idea of aristocracy.  But Aristotle was biased, believing that by nature some persons are more excellent than others, that some are more suited by nature to be followers, not leaders. (Aristotle used such logic in defending the institution of slavery, for instance.)   Today, we might argue that any sort of "aristocracy" or elitism is always an oligarchy, an arbitrary system in which a few dominate over the many because of factors that can't rationally be defended.

For another answer on a similar question, read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/9475348#readmore
8 0
3 years ago
Do you think the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was worth it? Why or why not?
Vlada [557]
This is a matter of opinion.  Do YOU think the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was worth it?  Let's look at the factors.

What were some of the positives?  Well, firstly, it ended World War II.  That's kind of a big deal.  In fact, it caused Japan not only to surrender, but UNCONDITIONALLY surrender.  Basically, that means the US could ask Japan to do whatever it liked--which the US liked!  Secondly, it was a triumph of science.  The atomic bomb was a revolutionary work of science.  Nothing like it had ever been made before, and it was all based on secrecy and theoretical science.  The atomic bomb also <span>provided the basis for new, improved weapons, including the hydrogen bomb.  </span>Thirdly, it helped establish the United States as a world power.  Knowing about this super powerful weapon the US had, countries were likely to back off!  

But there's a lot of negatives here, too.  Keep in mind that most of these benefits were for the United States alone.  Of course, there was one other BIG negative for the United States, and that's cost.  The atomic bomb was worth billions of dollars!  A second big one wasn't so much for the United States as for the world, especially Japan.  When the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the effects on the people and city were devastating.  People were vaporized.  Cities and buildings were flattened, and nothing is left but carnage.  People died, their skin peeling off, from cancer and radiation.  It was awful!  Thirdly, it caused the arms race.  Knowing the US had this super weapon, ALL the countries started building their own.  Now, we pretty much live in fear of all the nuclear weapons there are today--which are hundreds of times more powerful each than the first bomb!

So what do you think?  Was it worth it?
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • After World War II, Germany was divided into four occupation zones with a zone each for Great Britain, the Soviet Union, the Uni
    11·2 answers
  • Back then why was it so important to look for freedom
    13·1 answer
  • The writings of Ayuba Suleiman Diallo are an important source of information on the slave trade because
    14·2 answers
  • Why was Benjamin Franklin chosen as ambassador to France?
    12·2 answers
  • How can we define capitalism, socialism and communism ?
    9·1 answer
  • During the Industrial Age, what was the main method that businesses used to inform consumers about new inventions they could
    5·2 answers
  • Which of these is the largest desert in the world?
    10·1 answer
  • Which of the following was a major challenge that faced the United States after the Revolution?
    14·1 answer
  • Was woodrow Wilson successful in getting the allied powers to consider his fourteen points
    10·1 answer
  • Geography is the study of
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!