Disagree
try getting it from socratic :)
Answer:
The Radical movement arose in the late 18th century to support parliamentary reform, with additional aims including lower taxes and the abolition of sinecures.[1] John Wilkes's reformist efforts in the 1760s as editor of The North Briton and MP were seen as radical at the time, but support dropped away after the Massacre of St George's Fields in 1768. Working class and middle class "Popular Radicals" agitated to demand the right to vote and assert other rights including freedom of the press and relief from economic distress, while "Philosophic Radicals" strongly supported parliamentary reform, but were generally hostile to the arguments and tactics of the Popular Radicals. However, the term “Radical” itself, as opposed to “reformer” or “Radical Reformer”, only emerged in 1819 during the upsurge of protest following the successful conclusion of the Napoleonic War.[2] Henry "Orator" Hunt was the main speaker at the Manchester meeting in 1819 that ended in the Peterloo Massacre; Hunt was elected MP for the Preston division in 1830-32.
Explanation:
It depends. The true definition, with is roughly law without force, then it wouldn't be too bad. Sounds like it would just be a non corrupt world. However, modern day groups like ANTIFA, it would suck. Things have been blown out of proportion honestly to the point where anarchy, or "anti-fascism", almost looks like fascism.
Answer:
it was the seneca falls declaration
Explanation:
because they wee tryed of women complaning so they held a convention and made this document
Answer:
Madison defines a faction as a number of citizens
Explanation:
whether it's a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by common passions or interests, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
