<span>
He wanted to engage each tribe in a meeting to discuss peace.
He wanted to keep them under control and within their limits.
</span>
Answer:
The correct answer is A. Jackson relies on long, flowing sentences, whereas Rutledge relies on short, direct sentences.
Explanation
The difference between Andrew Jackson’s address to the Congress and Michael Rutledge’s “Samuel’s Memory” is clearly writing techniques and the use of language. Jackson’s sentences are long and very often not really to the point, which makes him sound very intelligent and believable. On the other hand, Rutledge uses short and simple sentences that are straight to the point.
Ottomans had to prove that there was no other country of origin other than Egypt and they had blood ties with Egypt.
<u>Explanation:</u>
When there was a denial on the fact that the Ottomans were not Egyptians, they had to prove that they were tru Egyptians and did not have any other blood ties.
For this, the Ottomans had to show the evidence that these people had no other home or place of orgin other than Egypt. More over they had to proof that there was blood ties between Egypt and the Ottomans.
Answer:
Citizen's duty represents the moral commitment of the citizen, imposed on someone to perform a morally, legally or professionally right action for the work, superiors, elders, etc.
Responsibility represents the liability accepted by a person, as a part of his job role or profession.
Explanation:
Citizen's duty is a binding force that implies an obligation or moral commitment which we are expected to perform. A duty refers to an obligatory action in general or specific situations.
Responsibility makes us in charge for the completion of the tasks that we accept within our job role along with the consequences which can be positive or negative.
Answer:
See below.
Explanation:
One is determined by the other. Civic action, from the 50's through the 60's, which was often meant with acts of extreme violence, led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So they are linked and one is dependent on the other.
Given that it is very difficult to isolate any one as being more or less effective than another. Civil rights action was targeted to be as effective as possible economically and politically. Leaders such as Martin Luther King emphasized the need for peaceful means of protest. So pressure group activity such as marches, demonstrations and lobbying politicians was combined with economic boycotts which hit the white economy in the south.
The greater the media coverage and outrage at the continued abuse of civil rights then the greater the pressure on the federal government to pass appropriate legislation. So how successful ahs this legislation been?
The Civil Rights Act in 1964 was followed by the Voting Rights Act in 1965, outlawing discriminatory practices in voting which was still commonplace in the south.
Passing legislation is one thing but making it effective is another. Minority groups have had to continue to fight in the courts to overcome discrimination and harassment. In 2000 the Presidential election came down to a few voting wards in Florida. Those primarily African-American suffered disenfranchisement, Chad machines that didn't work and road blocks. This, in effect, put Bush Jnr in the White House.
