How did Spain and Great Britain differ in their reasons for interfering in South America and India?
Great Britain sought to protect developing nations,
while Spain sought to conquer other civilizations.
O While Spain wanted people in its holdings to convert
to Christianity, Great Britain was only interested in
installing a British form of government in colonial
holdings.
O Converting indigenous peoples to Roman
calmolicism was a major motivation for Spain,
whereas Great Britain emphasized economic and
political control.
O Great Britain wanted to demonstrate its military
might, while Spain only sought to expand
Catholicism in its colonial holdings in South America.

the articles of confederation only set up the continental congress at the federal level. there were no executive or judicial branches except within the states. the states were allowed to keep every right that was not specifically given to congress. the bonding of the states was through a 'firm league of friendship' that best served as a defense agreement against invasion. states were not allowed to use taxes as a way to discourage treaties, and states were extremely limited in their dealings with foreign nations.

not many historians today talk about the strengths of the articles of confederation, likely because of how unpopular the document quickly became. the articles did set the legislative body, congress, as the highest power in the nation because of the fear of monarchy. congress had the sole power to declare war, assign treaties, entertain foreign relations, and operate post offices. disputes between states and territorial issues were to be brought to congress. the document also stipulated that canada was allowed to enter the union if they desired.

there were more weaknesses than strengths under the articles of confederation. the lack of power given to the continental congress strangled the federal government. the articles gave congress the power to pass laws but no power to enforce those laws. if a state did not support a federal law, that state could simply ignore it. congress had no power to levy taxes or regulate trade. without a federal court system or executive leader, there would be no way to enforce these laws, either. amending the articles of confederation would also require a unanimous decision, which would be extremely difficult.

affirmative action refers to the policies that take gender, race, or ethnicity into account in order to promote equal opportunity.

employers subject to title vii are prohibited from taking race or sex into account in any employment decisions. aa is a penalty for having any job group substantially statistically "underutilized" in any race or either sex. the employer must take steps to eliminate the underutilization, then stop, ending its aa efforts

the answer to this question is the third option. hope this

the intolerable acts were punitive laws passed by the british parliament in 1774 after the boston tea party. in great britain, these laws were referred to as the coercive acts.