Amid the 1850s, there was a sectional emergency. The sectional emergency was a period in American history where each "area" of the United States went about as its own particular element without respect to the prosperity of whatever remains of the country.
Fundamentally, every one of these occasions finished and started off the Civil War. It was the ideal tempest. The majority of the years preceding the sectional emergency, subjugation had been disregarded by Congress and no choices were made certifying or denouncing it.
Answer: Cities
Explanation:
Political maps are designed to show governmental boundaries of countries, states, and counties, the location of major cities, and they usually include significant bodies of water.
Answer:
C
Explanation:
United States history, the Redeemers were a political coalition in the Southern United States during the Reconstruction Era that followed the Civil War. Redeemers were the Southern wing of the Bourbon Democrats, the conservative, pro-business faction in the Democratic Party. They sought to regain their political power and enforce white supremacy. Their policy of Redemption was intended to oust the Radical Republicans, a coalition of freedmen, "carpetbaggers", and "scalawags". They generally were led by the rich former planters, businessmen, and professionals, and they dominated Southern politics in most areas from the 1870s to 1910.
During Reconstruction, the South was under occupation by federal forces, and Southern state governments were dominated by Republicans, elected largely by freedmen and allies. Republicans nationally pressed for the granting of political rights to the newly-freed slaves as the key to their becoming full citizens. The Thirteenth Amendment (banning slavery), Fourteenth Amendment (guaranteeing the civil rights of former slaves and ensuring equal protection of the laws), and Fifteenth Amendment (prohibiting the denial of the right to vote on grounds of race, color, or previous condition of servitude), enshrined such political rights in the Constitution.
(from Wikapedia)
Answer and Explanation:
Jacob Mchangama and Guglielmo Verdirame, in their article “The Danger of Human Rights Proliferation,” defend liberty by the motto of “less are more.”
We are asserting more and more rights without checking out the implementation of previous rights. Asserting more rights and convincing the states to add them in treaties would not lead to more excellent protection of human rights.
The proliferation of rights is more harmful to humans because human rights are not protected fully as we are expanding the number of rights in treaties.
They argued that: “If human rights were a currency, its value would be free fall……..this currency is buy cover for dictatorships ”
Rights of human language have been used to restrict rights. Freedom of religion and expression was a foundation of human rights, but states also restricted those rights in the name of human rights.
To sum up, the proliferation of human rights does not ensure that the rights of humans are being secured. States are not always concerned directly with the welfare of humans but to restrict those rights more. So the proliferation of rights is not fruitful but a dangerous thing.
Answer:
When there is honesty within a group, the people would be able to trust in the leader since there is honesty and the work done would be transparent. With trust, the leader would be able to convince the group to follow him/her, resulting in effective leadership.
Explanation:
I'm not very very very sure but I tried lol
Comment if you don't understand.
