<span>The primary purpose of the Immigration Act of 1924 was to "to reduce Asian and European immigration" since it limited the number of immigrants who could enter the United States per year from a specific country. </span>
The answer you're looking for could be a HEDONIST or an EPICUREAN.
"Hedonism" is the general philosophical term for someone seeking pleasure -- though how pleasure was defined differed between different persons.
Epicureans were a particular group in Greco-Roman history that had "pleasure-seeking" as a core belief.
Let's clarify what "pleasure seeking" meant in the original theory of the the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus. Epicurus (341-270 BC) believed that the universe and all life within it is essentially a random interaction of atomic particles. So according to Epicurus, human life is what we have while we're living in this form, but there is no afterlife of individual souls. So he advocated that the best way to live life, while we are alive, was to seek pleasure and avoid pain. But his definition of "pleasure" was not some wild party, but the most comfortable and fulfilling sort of mental and physical existence. So he urged living a life of moderation in order to avoid as much pain as possible. Pursuing highly emotional relationships or stressful responsibilities in society would cause too much mental pain, he thought, so he refrained from such things. Similarly, eating too much of rich foods can make you sick, or drinking too much leaves you with a hangover -- so the pain isn't worth the initial pleasure you might feel. Epicurus and his followers lived very simple lives in order to be free of as much mental and physical pain as possible.
Some have characterized the "Epicurean" way of life as one that says, "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die!" But Epicurus himself would not have pursued a lifestyle that sought excessive pleasure through eating, drinking and partying, because too much pain would come along with it..
<span>Religious beliefs have
highly influenced the political and hierarchical structures in both Ottoman and
Safavid Persia empires. Although both states were of Islamic religion, they
belonged to different branches, Sunni and Shia. These branches differ over the
choice of Muhammad's successor, which subsequently acquired broader political
significance, as well as theological and juridical dimensions. Sunni Muslims
believed that Muhammad didn’t clearly appoint a successor, which is why there
isn’t hereditary succession law in Ottoman Empire. This contrasts with the Shia
Muslims view, which holds that Muhammad appointed his son-in-law and cousin Ali
ibn Abi Talib to succeed him. They believed that the empire should be led by
direct successor of Muhammad’s line. Differences between these two branches
affected the politics, as Shia Muslims weren’t religiously tolerant to other
confessions and considered them for heretics, even the other branches of Islam.
This resulted in the besieged of Bagdad, which was followed by the massacre of
a large part of its Sunni Muslim inhabitants, as it was endeavored to transform
Baghdad into a purely Shiite city. The besiege of Bagdad was the event that led
to the Ottoman-Safavid war (1623–1639).</span>
In the late 1800s people in many parts of the world decided to leave their homes and immigrate to the us fleeing crop failure land and job shortages rising taxes and famine many came to the us because it was previewed as the economic opportunity so
Technically they were they were given a far chance but at the same time they had to start over completely and live off of trying to farm they were out on their own.
