There was no national court system to settle interstate disputes, forcing settlements to occur in the courts of one of the states involved. Also, propositions for new laws had to be approved by all thirteen states, often resulting in divided votes making progress difficult. The value of the national currency quickly depreciated as the states began to print their own money, eventually harming interstate trade. The American market was soon flooded with European goods while hefty tariffs and trade restrictions were imposed on many products being exported from the United States. The weak and divided economy kept the United States
Another Major flaw was that “the country, whose president, Woodrow Wilson, had dreamt up the idea of the League - America -, refused to join it.” The league’s most powerful militaries Britain and France not only suffered casualties, but also economically as they were greatly in debt to the United States. Because of this neither country was enthusiastic to get involved in disputes that did not affect Western Europe. Therefore the League had no military might and could only enforce economic sanctions in hope that they worked against aggressive nations. All these flaws point to signs that the League of Nations was a failure. However, even though there were a few setbacks, the league was a success in many ways.
Finally, Hobson partially blames the ineffectiveness of Imperialism on the British ideal of Anglo superiority, and the British misunderstanding of other cultures (Winks 11). Therefore, as argued by Hobson, British Imperialism of India was neither socially, nor politically, nor economically beneficial for Britain. The British elevated social tensions in India because the British misunderstood Indian culture, were constantly forced to over-expand the British Government, and spent endless amounts in an attempt to maintain order. To begin with, Britain’s Imperialism of India was not socially beneficial. The British were unsuccessful in establishing a working relationship with the Indian people, and, as a result, British Imperialism never reached its maximum potential.
The Unequal Burden of Tax: Tax Reform and the Civil War The taxation of the South and its people were of varying degrees and severity. At the onset of Reconstruction, Northerners had little sympathy to Southern economic plight. With the progression of Reconstruction and a slow realization that the tax laws were not helping the South, but rather stunting it, Northern Congressmen sought to lift the burden of taxes from the South. Northern thought during the Reconstruction shifted greatly from punishing the South with excise taxes and tariffs to identifying with the South’s need of economic growth and stability. While there was no absolute even ground in the fairness of taxation in the rebellious states, Northerners realized their faults in tax legislation, thus developing a more lenient system capable of allowing the southern economy to strengthen and flourish.
A few of these restrictions are as follows: the Catholics were not allowed to vote, they couldn’t marry a Protestant, they couldn’t attend Trinity College, they weren’t able to obtain orphans, they couldn’t be in the military or even own firearms and they weren’t able to buy land unless they had less than a thirty year lease. Overall, the Irish people were struggling politically, economically, agriculturally, socially and religiously. The Irish people struggled politically because they had no power. A trade deficit caused them to struggle economically. According to Lein, Swift and his friends believed that the English were planning to throw Ireland into even more savage conditions.
• financial crisis faced by Louis that meant that he needed more money; weakness of the Ancien Regime’s system excluded nobility from paying and this therefore needed to be changed – something some nobility did not want • actions of Necker; he had made out that there was no need for any change in the tax system by saying via the Compte Rendu that the financial system was working well (and so nobility did not see urgency of reform) • ideas of philosophes which helped to strengthen arguments of nobility that the king could not force through change, was acting tyrannically and that the parlements were acting in the name of the people. and some of the following short-term/immediate factors: • actions of de Brienne and Calonne in trying to get radical tax reforms agreed to by the Assembly of Notables and the parlements. These reforms involved a land tax to be paid by everyone. This led to opposition from 1st and 2nd estate who had most to lose. The nobility claimed that such drastic change could only be decided on by an Estates General (most at the Assembly of Notables accepted the principle of a land tax but not the means of bringing it about) • weaknesses and mistakes of the King and his ministers: mistakes of Calonne in thinking that an Assembly of Notables would agree to such reforms – also of appealing to the public behind the back of the assembly which lost him support.
This was the weakness of the league. Also Germany wasn’t a member due to the reason of creating WWI and USSR wasn’t a member too as they were communists. Other problem includes the truth that it was created as a part of Treaty of Versailles which indirectly meant that the league will be a serving favor of the big4. Due to these, member states were able to create chaos in the League where it already didn’t have any controls. Also the league wasn’t responsible enough to take care of all the problems in Europe as its powers were not so strong.
They were losing to a nation very few had heard of and it was humiliating. However, many of the defeats to the Russian military occurred after the Revolution had started, not causing its outbreak, but merely adding to the opposition to autocratic rule by the Tsar and prolonging the Revolution. The Russo-Japanese War brought economic problems for Russia, and this therefore meant there was a significant lack of money to solve any other problems present Russia, hence partly being responsible for the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution. The war costed an extreme amount of money. As it resulted in failure no money could be gained from the invaded territories.
An example of these was the non importation movement. In this movement, Americans stopped buying goods from the British goods as a protest against stamp tax. This action was not defiant in nature and did not call for punishment from the British government. On the contrary, it put a lot of pressure on the government and forced it to react by repealing the stamp act (Greene & Pole, 2004). Violent reactions were, therefore, not effective as they received violent reaction from the government and did not bring the desired change to the colonists.
They were losing to a nation very few had heard of and it was humiliating. However, many of the defeats to the Russian military occurred after the Revolution had started, not causing its outbreak, but merely adding to the opposition to autocratic rule by the Tsar and prolonging the Revolution. The Russo-Japanese War also brought about economic problems for Russia, and this therefore meant there was a significant lack of money to solve any of Russia’s other problems, hence contributing to the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution. The war cost an extreme amount of money and as it resulted in failure no money could be gained from the invaded territories. Russia had already had economic problems, and its economy