The Métis were justified in their actions as they sought to protect their rights, culture, and land against encroaching colonial powers. Their grievances, including the loss of traditional territories and the erosion of their way of life, were significant factors driving their resistance. The Métis uprisings, particularly the Red River and North-West Rebellions, were responses to perceived injustices and a lack of representation. Ultimately, their actions highlighted the need for recognition and respect for Indigenous rights in Canada.
The Metis were justified in seizing Fort Garry in 1869 as a response to their concerns over land rights, cultural preservation, and political representation amid the expansion of Canadian governance into their territory. The transfer of Rupert's Land to Canada without adequate consultation or consideration for the Metis and other local populations prompted fears of marginalization. Their actions aimed to assert their rights and protect their community's interests during a time of significant upheaval. Ultimately, the seizure was a strategic move to negotiate better terms for the Metis within the framework of the emerging Canadian state.
Not everyone will agree. If you believe Bonifacio's actions were tresonous, yes his execution was justified. If you believe his actions were not treasonous, then his execution was not justified.
Louis Riel didnt fight metis people, he was a metis, he was fighting FOR the metis
because he just wanted to isn't it simple! he just wanted tot save the Metis because they are poor!
The Metis Rebellion was when the Metis People in Canada fought for their rights and freedom, fighting because the Canadian Government was not treating them well. it was also known as the Red River Rebellion. I've attached a link to a good website for more detailed.
The Metis were justified in seizing Fort Garry in 1869 as a response to their concerns over land rights, cultural preservation, and political representation amid the expansion of Canadian governance into their territory. The transfer of Rupert's Land to Canada without adequate consultation or consideration for the Metis and other local populations prompted fears of marginalization. Their actions aimed to assert their rights and protect their community's interests during a time of significant upheaval. Ultimately, the seizure was a strategic move to negotiate better terms for the Metis within the framework of the emerging Canadian state.
Not everyone will agree. If you believe Bonifacio's actions were tresonous, yes his execution was justified. If you believe his actions were not treasonous, then his execution was not justified.
Whether or not Lincoln's actions were justified is a matter of opinion. His actions had two purposes: he wanted to preserve the union and he wanted to end slavery. Compare that with perhaps one million men dead. In my opinion his actions were justified. You will have to decide for yourself.
Odysseus' actions may seem justified in the context of the challenges he faced and the need for survival during his journey. However, some of his actions, such as blinding the Cyclops, can be seen as ruthless and vengeful. Ultimately, whether his actions are justified is open to interpretation based on moral and ethical perspectives.
no
no
idk
no,
Pete's actions were not justified in the story, although he tried to make up for his actions by staying near Cecile and the 8 children (Ralph's wife and their children) after he was released from the hospital, to help them out.
yes
George Washington Plunkintt
jacckson was justified becaue he was righht and he was trying to help the poor instead of the rich getting more money