Corrupt leaders made the democracy of Rome compromise itself and led to monarchy and then sometimes to ruin
Explanation:
The Democracy of Rome had many intricacies that excluded a number of people from ever participating and made it in a way an exclusive group that could ever hope to hold political power.
This made it easier for the government to be very corrupt and they had very little accountability.
The people became dissatisfied and thus many times supported the foundation of monarchy or even found the city in state of civil war multiple times in centuries.
Through much of the nineteenth century, Great Britain avoided the kind of social upheaval that intermittently plagued the Continent between 1815 and 1870. Supporters of Britain claimed that this success derived from a tradition of vibrant parliamentary democracy. While this claim holds some truth, the Great Reform Bill of 1832, the landmark legislation that began extending the franchise to more Englishmen, still left the vote to only twenty percent of the male population. A second reform bill passed in 1867 vertically expanded voting rights, but power remained in the hands of a minority--property-owning elites with a common background, a common education, and an essentially common outlook on domestic and foreign policy. The pace of reform in England outdistanced that of the rest of Europe, but for all that remained slow. Though the Liberals and Conservatives did advance different philosophy on the economy and government in its most basic sense, the common brotherhood on all representatives in parliament assured a relatively stable policy-making history.
Sorry it's so long but that's the answer toy your question...Hope this helps:)
Answer:
$199
Explanation:
$1,999 THANK YOU :) FOLLOW MY
IG: ITSJUSTALEXISSS
Well its designated area is Peru and about 1,000 people lived there,they up high in the mountains and machu pichu was part of the inca empire,its nick name was "the lost city" and it was a popular district
