Athens in the 5th to 4th century BCE had an extraordinary system of government: democracy. Under this system, all male citizens had equal political rights, freedom of speech, and the opportunity to participate directly in the political arena. Further, not only did citizens participate in a direct democracy whereby they themselves made the decisions by which they lived, but they also actively served in the institutions that governed them, and so they directly controlled all parts of the political process
The sepoy mutiny int he Indian subcontinent was instigated by political and social reasons. The predominant religions at the time in the subcontinent were Hinduism and Islam, the followers could not eat beef and pork respectively. The Indian population was practically enslaved by the British East India Company and how little to no rights. The soldiers that were conscripted, known as sepoys, were forced to fight in many wars such as the Afghan wars. What was the immediate catalyst was the forcing of them to put their mouths to animal grease (beef and pork) that lined their cartridges. This was one of the direct instigations of the sepoy mutiny.
If by "difference" you mean the difference with other Enlightenment thinkers who argued on behalf of the social contract, the main difference was Rousseau's emphasis on the GENERAL WILL of the people.
Along with other Enlightenment thinkers, Rousseau agreed with the idea of the social contract. (Indeed, that's the title of one of his most famous books.) The idea of a "social contract" is that the people agree to give authority to a government in order to make their lives in society better.
In his social contract theory, Rousseau insisted that that the PEOPLE of a nation are SOVEREIGN -- meaning that the people are always the ones who are to be deciding matters for their own society. Rousseau famously asserted that the "GENERAL WILL" of the people is always right, because the people on the whole have the best sense of what is needed for them as a society.
Some have criticized Rousseau's approach as promoting an unworkable view of government run completely by democratic referendum. But if you read his famous book, <em>The Social Contract, </em>you'll see his view of the "general will" is more nuanced than that. It isn't just a majority ballot sort of thing. For instance, in the 2016 presidential election in America, the "general will" that was most expressing itself was that the country wasn't greatly happy about either candidate running for the office of chief executive of the country. If Rousseau's "general will" principle had been put into action, the nation might have called for a new round of nominations to produce a candidate that could have pulled the nation together rather than divisive candidates and parties pulling the country in opposite directions.
Answer:
Luther didn't agree with the Church. He didn't like that the Church had become political, he didn't like that the Bible was written in Latin and most people couldn't read it, and he didn't agree with purgatory and the selling of indulgences.
Explanation:
I would feel greatly honored. The Declaration of Independance was one of this nations most important documents to this date. I would try my best to be a prime example and enforcer of what its core is. Life, Liberty, and Justice.
