<span>A tsar was removed from the people and was rarely seen.
The tsar of the early 1900s was an absolute monarch with much control and answered little to the people. Though there were attempts at reform and the creation of a representative body called the Duma, the Tsar, especially Nicholas II, was known to shut it down or event attempted to remove it. Nicholas II would be the last tsar of Russia being forced to abdicate, step down, his throne in 1917. </span>
To the Valley Temple
It is special for kings especially, usually they are brought to the land of the dead.
Hope this helps you!!
<span>Certainly not. The United States has never, since its founding, consisted of a small number of citizens, still less of citizens that could practically assemble in one place at one time and debate their actions. A pure democracy in this classical Greek city-state sense was never practical, and was not seriously considered.
What the Framers created was a constitutional representative republic. Sovereignty is vested in the people, like a democracy (and unlike a constitutional monarchy), but the people do not rule directly. Instead, they elect representatives, at regular intervals, and these rule in the peoples' stead. Their powers are limited, first, by the fact that they are elected for only short terms, and must be re-elected if they wish to continue in power, and secondly, and much more importantly, by the Constitution itself, which puts express written limits on their powers even between elections.</span>
Mark Twain called the late 19th century the "Gilded Age." By this, he meant that the period was glittering on the surface but corrupt underneath.
Philippine independence was declared.
