The Decisions That Changed History
Explore pivotal historical choices, their immediate consequences, and the pressures and negotiations behind them.
Preview
Questions with solutions-
1. Valitse oikea vastaus.
Which action became the center of the campaign?
In 1955, Rosa Parks was arrested after refusing to give up her seat on a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Civil rights organizers responded with a coordinated campaign.
- A strike by the city's bus drivers.
- A boycott of the city's buses.
- A series of sit-ins at the city's lunch counters.
- A boycott of the city's public schools.
The campaign put pressure on the service involved in the arrest.
Show solution
- A boycott of the city's buses.
Participants relied on carpools and walking, allowing the bus boycott to continue for more than a year.
-
2. Valitse oikea vastaus.
How did border guards ultimately respond to the crowds?
On November 9, 1989, an East German official mistakenly announced that new travel rules took effect immediately. Crowds gathered at checkpoints along the Berlin Wall that evening.
- They required everyone to obtain an exit visa before crossing.
- They redirected everyone to government travel offices.
- They kept the crossings closed until new procedures arrived.
- They opened the crossings and let people through.
The public announcement moved faster than the official procedures.
Show solution
- They opened the crossings and let people through.
The first crossing opened without a clear order from above, as local officers faced mounting pressure.
-
3. Valitse oikea vastaus.
Why was collecting salt an act of civil disobedience?
In 1930, Gandhi led a march to India's coast and collected salt in defiance of British salt laws. British authorities controlled legal salt production and taxed this everyday necessity.
- It deliberately broke a law to challenge colonial control.
- It enforced British restrictions against unauthorized salt producers.
- It used an official exemption to avoid challenging the law.
- It challenged a voluntary trading agreement rather than a legal restriction.
Civil disobedience involves a deliberate relationship between protest and law.
Show solution
- It deliberately broke a law to challenge colonial control.
The salt tax affected rich and poor alike, making an everyday necessity a powerful focus for resistance.
-
4. Valitse oikea vastaus.
What made this crossing a challenge to Rome's political order?
In 49 BCE, Julius Caesar led his troops across the Rubicon into Italy instead of relinquishing his military command.
- He accepted a civilian appointment and dissolved his army.
- He withdrew from Roman territory without the Senate's permission.
- He brought an army beyond the area where his command legally applied.
- He transferred his troops to a rival under the Senate's authority.
The river marked a boundary of military authority.
Show solution
- He brought an army beyond the area where his command legally applied.
A provincial commander could not simply bring his forces into Italy. Caesar's crossing helped trigger a civil war.
-
5. Valitse oikea vastaus.
What principle about royal power did the charter assert?
In 1215, England's King John accepted Magna Carta under pressure from rebellious barons. The charter required the crown to respect specified rights and legal procedures.
- The king's personal wishes automatically overrode legal procedures.
- Royal authority was subject to agreed-upon legal limits.
- The barons acquired unlimited authority to punish the king's subjects.
- Royal courts were abolished in favor of decisions by local nobles.
Consider whether the ruler stood entirely above the rules.
Show solution
- Royal authority was subject to agreed-upon legal limits.
The charter did not establish modern democracy: much of it addressed the rights and grievances of powerful landholders.
-
6. Valitse oikea vastaus.
Which limitation is essential to understanding this decision?
Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 under his wartime authority. It applied to designated areas in rebellion, not to slaveholding states that remained in the Union.
- It depended on approval from Confederate state governments.
- It applied only to enslaved people who joined the Union Army.
- It abolished slavery only in states that remained loyal to the Union.
- It did not abolish slavery throughout the United States.
Pay attention to the distinction between areas in rebellion and the country as a whole.
Show solution
- It did not abolish slavery throughout the United States.
Nationwide abolition came through the Thirteenth Amendment, ratified in 1865.
-
7. Valitse oikea vastaus.
What strategic aim guided these decisions?
After Napoleon's defeat, diplomats at the Congress of Vienna strengthened states around France and redistributed territory among Europe's major powers.
- Preventing any one power from dominating Europe.
- Uniting Europe under a single elected government.
- Making national self-determination the main rule for drawing borders.
- Restoring French control over its wartime conquests.
Consider why several strong neighboring states might be preferable to one dominant empire.
Show solution
- Preventing any one power from dominating Europe.
The settlement prioritized stability and dynastic interests, often placing the balance of power ahead of national aspirations.
-
8. Valitse oikea vastaus.
What did these decisions immediately enable?
In 1990, South Africa's government legalized the African National Congress and released Nelson Mandela. White-minority rule and many apartheid laws remained in place.
- The automatic transfer of power to the ANC.
- The immediate repeal of every apartheid law.
- Open political organization by the ANC and its participation in formal negotiations.
- Universal voting rights before any negotiations took place.
Distinguish permission to participate from control of the state.
Show solution
- Open political organization by the ANC and its participation in formal negotiations.
Ending political bans removed a major obstacle to talks; ending apartheid required further agreements and legal changes.
-
9. Valitse oikea vastaus.
How did financial pressure constrain Britain's decision?
During the 1956 Suez Crisis, Britain faced pressure on the pound. The United States withheld financial support while demanding an end to the military intervention, and Britain accepted a cease-fire.
- Outside financial support became available regardless of Britain's military decisions.
- The risk to the currency limited Britain's ability to continue the operation.
- Continuing the intervention removed Britain's need for outside financial assistance.
Military capability and the financial capacity to sustain an operation are not the same.
Show solution
- The risk to the currency limited Britain's ability to continue the operation.
The crisis exposed a gap between Britain's ability to deploy force and its ability to withstand pressure from a powerful ally.
-
10. Valitse oikea vastaus.
How did the private agreement complement the public settlement?
To end the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the Soviet Union agreed to remove its missiles from Cuba. The United States publicly pledged not to invade Cuba and privately agreed to remove its Jupiter missiles from Turkey.
- It required both missile withdrawals to be announced and completed simultaneously.
- It allowed Washington to keep its missiles in Turkey while publicly promising their removal.
- It meant Soviet withdrawal involved no corresponding change in US missile deployments.
- It added a reciprocal US concession without publicly presenting the settlement as a missile trade.
Separate what each side agreed to do from what it announced publicly.
Show solution
- It added a reciprocal US concession without publicly presenting the settlement as a missile trade.
The missiles in Turkey were removed several months later; the two withdrawals were not simultaneous.