Why is it important to know how many people lived in urban (cities) and rural (farms) areas? What
change occurred as far as where people lived in the 1920s?

Answer:

Explanation:

Hello!

cuneiform script

sandals

harpoons

beer

Answer:

I think the best answer is a

Answer:

A. Ida Tarbell

Explanation:

The answer is Ida Tarbell

Answer:

When Gautama passed away around 483 B.C., his followers began to organize a religious movement. Buddha's teachings became the foundation for what would develop into Buddhism. In the 3rd century B.C., Ashoka the Great, the Mauryan Indian emperor, made Buddhism the state religion of India.

Explanation:

hopes it helps you☺

Answer:

B

They had a duty to improve society.

Explanation:

Women became leaders in a range of social and political movements from 1890 through 1920. This period is known as the Progressive Era. Progressive reformers wanted to end political corruption, improve the lives of individuals, and increase government intervention to protect citizens. Earlier generations discouraged women from participating in public, political movements, society began to embrace female activism in the late nineteenth century. Progressives often argued that women’s politics complemented their traditional roles as wives and mothers, caregivers and keepers of virtue.

Answer:

I thinkthe ans is B

Explanation:

all the best

Answer:

enakoooooooooooooooppppp

answer is b

Answer: a.sekularisasyon

Explanation:

Secularization is the process by which liberal ideas gain popularity in a society such that traditional and conservative ideals begin to lose influence and relevance.

Medieval Europe was very conservative but with the period of the Enlightenment, people began to be more scientific and liberal until Europe led the world in secularization. Now they actively encourage it and impose sanctions on some nations who go against the process especially in the area of LGBT rights.

The Bessemer Process was an innovative way to produce steel.

Answer:

Explanation:

The United States was motivated to build the Panama Canal to shorten ship routes. The only way to get from California to, let’s say, Brazil, was to go all around South America and waste so much time getting there. So as a result, The United States decided to build a canal for boats and ships to pass through in Central America to shorten the journey, and therefore getting goods faster and easier.

Hope this helps (:

The correct answer is False

Explanation

The word "subjective" is a concept that refers to the opinion or point of view of a person or group on a specific topic. While the word "objective" is a concept that refers to information or knowledge that does not include the opinion or point of view of its author, but rather focuses on the nature of a specific topic in general and specific. According to the above, the correct answer is false because subjective measures are not numerical or quantifiable but refer to an opinion or point of view and perceptions, while objective measures are not based on someone's perceptions but rather refer to numeric or quantifiable information.

Answer:

a. limitations on freedom of the press

Explanation:

As a result of the prime minister of Italy having majority ownership of the press establishments in the country, the MOST LIKELY consequence of this situation on the Italian media is that there will be limitations on freedom of the press.

This is because, as majority owner, Mr Berlusconi can attempt to control what the press says thereby severely limiting the freedom of the press.

Answer:

East Germany had been formed from the area of Germany that the Soviet Union had occupied and so became a Communist state.

West Germany had been formed from the areas that Britain, France and the U.S.A. occupied so became a democratic capitalist state.

West Germany

East Germany

Answer:

I as a person would have started enjoying the little things in life more. The novel in question beautiful depicts the ignorance of society towards the destruction of war and how they pushed many young men to hell in name of patriotic duty.  

I would have started enjoying things like time with family and friends, having a good meal twice a day and of course sanitized rooms and toilets in my place. I would have been less materialistic.

Answer:

1. Pagtutulad (simile)  – ginagamit sa paghahambing ng dalawang magkaibang bagay, tao, pangyayari at iba pa. Gumagamit ng mga salitang tulad ng, gaya ng, para ng, kawangis, atbp.

2. Pagwawangis (metaphor) – katulad ng pagtutulad ngunit hindi ito gumagamit ng mga salita gaya ng sa pagtutulad.

3. Pagmamalabis (hyperbole) – lubhang nagpapalabis sa kalagayan ng tao, hayop, bagay at halaman

4. Pagbibigay-katauhan (personification) – pagsasalin ng katangian ng tao sa mga bagay, may buhay man o wala

5. Pagpapalit-tawag (metonymy) – mahabang pangungusap na isang salita lamang ang katumbas

6. Pagpapalit-saklaw (synecdoche)  – maaari dito banggitin ang bahagi bilang pagtukoy sa kabuuan at maaaring isang tao ang kumakatawan sa isang grupo

Explanation:

Answer:

URL copied to clipboard

As the one hundredth anniversary of the beginning of World War I approaches, one may encounter some rather strained attempts to compare the current global balance of forces to that in Europe in 1914. I recently visited several countries in south east Asia and a different comparison struck me, the similarities between now and the 1930s, weak democracies and strong dictatorships.

This comparison “jumped off the page” after a week in Bangkok, followed by several days in Hanoi - a journey from a country with weak and faltering formal democratic institutions to an apparently stable one with an authoritarian regime (bordering on a country with a considerably more brutal dictatorship, China).

In The Age of Extremes, Eric Hobsbawm argued that the conflict between capitalism and communism determined the course of the twentieth century.  This confrontation of socio-economic ideologies without doubt dominated European and global history, especially after 1945.  But another, inter-related confrontation that determined the course of the century was authoritarianism versus democracy. The capitalism-communism conflict seems but a moment of history for people in their forties and younger. However, the danger of a rising authoritarian wave is as imminent in the twenty-first century as it was in the twentieth.

In most countries of Europe in the 1930s the contest between authoritarian and democratic visions of society dominated the political struggle. The exceptions were Italy where the fascists had already established an extreme version of authoritarian rule, and Britain where a rigid class structure gave stability to superficially democratic institutions. By the middle of the decade, capitalist authoritarian regimes were clearly on the rise in Germany and much of central and eastern Europe (e.g., Hungary and Poland), as well as Portugal, with Spain soon to join the anti-democratic camp.

Indeed, in very few of the industrialised countries in the late 1930s did democracy seem the stronger trend. Among the large countries only in the United States was there an unambiguous shift towards strengthening popular participation. Ironically enough it was during the presidency of patrician Franklin D Roosevelt that trade unions asserted themselves as a major political force (which would not survive much past mid-century).

Now, well into the twenty-first century it is even more difficult to find a major country with vigorous and democratic institutions, certainly not in the United States nor in Europe. In the United States the confrontation between a well-funded right wing Republican Party and the middle-of-the road Democrat Party dominates politics, one doctrinaire and aggressive, the other muddled and vascillating. The anti-democratic trend is demonstrated by passage of laws restricting the right to vote in Republican controlled states, linked to the racist xenophobia of the Tea Party. In the White House sits a Democrat apparently unconcerned by a massively intrusive national security complex.

In Europe anti-democratic trends are if anything stronger. Britain probably has the most extensive video surveillance network in Europe (see recent articles in the Guardian), as well as legal restrictions on the right of assembly, designed to reduce public protests (as we find in Spain). In addition, the Conservative-dominated coalition government’s brutal attack on poor households receiving social support in effect legalises civil rights violations. Surveillance, attacks on the poor and the government fanning fears of immigrants combine to make a potent anti-democratic package.

On the continent pre-existing authoritarian tendencies enjoyed a quantum leap under the EU-wide austerity regime fostered by the German government under the cover of the European Commission. The unelected governments in Greece (2011-12) and Italy (2011-13) represent the most obvious and shocking examples of the authoritarian trend.  Much more serious in the long term is the EU fiscal compact (officially named the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union).

This treaty, which came into effect at the beginning of 2013, severely limits the authority of national parliaments to set fiscal policy. The treaty and additional measures demanded by the German government remove fiscal policy from public control (with monetary policy in the hands of the European Central Bank and beyond national accountability). This process in which major decisions are taken away from the electorate fundamentally undermines public faith in the democratic process.

Explanation:

Authoritarian governments were able to flourish in the 1920s because democratic governments were failing especially in the late 1920s and early 1930s. On top of that socialism was spreading which scared many people and authoritarianism seemed like a better option than democracy for stopping socialism.

Authoritarian government is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting. Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government.

Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have sometimes been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.

Minimally defined, an authoritarian government lacks free and competitive direct elections to legislatures, free and competitive direct or indirect elections for executives, or both.

Learn more about authoritarian, here:

https://brainly.com/question/30019371

#SPJ2

Answer: Both ideologies encouraged their members to demand complete control over Palestine.

Explanation:

Jewish Nationalism is the nationalist movement and ideology which supports the Jewish state being centered in Palestine.

Arab nationalism is a nationalist ideology which believes that Arabs are a nation. It also enhances the unity of Arabs. The major similarity between Jewish nationalism and Arab nationalism during the 20th century is that ideologies encouraged their members to demand complete control over Palestine.

Answer:

B. The speaker wants to win an election.

Explanation:

In the given passage from a speech, the speaker delves into the point of corruption which his opponent has accused him of. But the speaker counters the accusation by deflecting the same accusation at his opponent.

The speaker openly declares, imploring the audience "[to] remember on Election Day who the real honest politician is in this race. It's certainly not the man on the other side of the aisle trying to distract us from his own bad character." This deflection is done to point out the faults of the opponent and paint a good, much better picture/image of himself to garner support so that he can win the election.

Thus, the correct answer is option A.

Answer:

C

Racism

Belief that there are distinct human races with inherent differences which determine their abilities, and generally that some are superior and others inferior.

Answer:

Yes I would

Explanation:

If I were alive at the time, I think I would have advocated to keep the plantation system after the abolishment of slavery.

This is because, it was an already proven and working system, but instead of using slaves, hired workers would be gotten, instead.

Answer:

1)The immediate result of the mutiny was a general housecleaning of the Indian administration.

2)The East India Company was abolished in favour of the direct rule of India by the British government.

Answer:

The answer is below

Explanation:

There are various causes or reasons that led to the British North America Act of 1867, some of which are

1. The provinces proposed to become one dominion with a single Constitution similar principle compared to that of the United Kingdom.

2. To ensure that Canada would be a mostly independent nation.

3. Britain no longer wanted to play to defend Canada's interest.

The British North America Act of 1867 unite the four provinces that formed the independent nation of Canada today, including New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Ontario, and gave them self-government.

Answer:

True

Explanation:

The vast majority of Italians who came to the United States were very poor peasants or workers from Southern Italy (the poorest part of Italy), who had to live in harsh conditions, work for long hours, and support each other in order to survive during their first years in the United States.

Italian American women did not only work as domestic servants to help support their families, but also as laborers in factories, because most Italians emigrated to the industrial Northeast, and also in shops, restaurants, bars, and even agriculture.

Answer: