English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

pleasee

2007-09-16 20:48:56 · 2 answers · asked by kimneedsathesis 1 in Arts & Humanities History

2 answers

There is no comparison. Pilgrims undertook a journey because they wanted to, whatever hardships they had to undergo on the way. Refugees have no option but to leave their homes.

2007-09-16 21:22:46 · answer #1 · answered by rdenig_male 7 · 0 0

Well, for starters, most refugees don't get pristine land like the pilgrims had. They are forced into the most decrepit conditions imaginable and are forced to remain there and follow a strict set of guidelines. The pilgrims ultimately had a seemingly never-ending amount of space and resources to do as they pleased. Most refugee camps have an extremely limited supply of even the most basic of needs so rationing is a must and often crimes such as murder result from the lack of supplies. Plus it is a different era. The pilgrims didn't have to worry about their exploitation of the native Americans making the 8 o'clock news. Should refugees break out into a riot and kill the indigenous people for their food they would immediately be chastised and any aid that was going their way would cease to come. When comparing time periods its always important to remember that the only constant is change, so what works one day may not work the next. I hope I was helpful to you.

2007-09-17 04:20:28 · answer #2 · answered by Omega_Red9 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers