Considering the available options, the statement that best support evidence that Thomas Jefferson was an Anti-
Federalist is "<u>Jefferson authored the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom."</u>
<h3>What is Anti-Federalist?</h3>
Anti-Federalist is a disposition or belief that states and individuals should have more rights and independence than the national government.
<h3>How Anti-Federalist is Similar to Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom</h3>
Like Anti-Federalist belief, the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom promotes states affairs to be separated from church and individual rights and freedom to practice his religion as he wishes without being forced.
Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom was written by Thomas Jefferson and was enacted in 1786.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded ty the correct answer is option D.
Learn more about the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom here: brainly.com/question/14990854
It would be A because the colony's couldn't vote<span />
B. They were the largest participants in the Great Migration.
Formulation stage of policy making includes promises to the public about new policies.
Option D
Explanation:
The formulation is the suggestion of explications to plan issues. Policy formulation depicting the progression of a plan and explication that addresses the obstacle and that is socially satisfactory and politically appetizing.
Formulation frequently contributes policymakers with numerous options for fixing plan matters. The policy needs to be a real step in resolving the issue most efficiently achievable. The efficient formulation comprises the study and description of dilemmas to resolving issues. Furthermore, policies necessity be politically attainable. In formulation, it is imperative to split the structure down into more inadequate parts and to display the foremost contents to the public
Remembering Tiananmen in Hong Kong has been viewed as an act of defiance for years, and it has become even more so now that the city’s own democratic future has come under threat. In the run-up to the 30th anniversary, demonstrators marched through the semi-autonomous enclave’s financial district chanting, “justice will prevail” and toting “support freedom” umbrellas. “In China, [people] can’t say anything against the government,” says Au Wai Sze, a nurse in Hong Kong who marched along with her 15-year-old daughter. “So while we in Hong Kong can still speak [out], we must represent the voice of the Chinese people and remind the world of this injustice.” Remembering Tiananmen in Hong Kong has been viewed as an act of defiance for years, and it has become even more so now that the city’s own democratic future has come under threat. In the run-up to the 30th anniversary, demonstrators marched through the semi-autonomous enclave’s financial district chanting, “justice will prevail” and toting “support freedom” umbrellas. “In China, [people] can’t say anything against the government,” says Au Wai Sze, a nurse in Hong Kong who marched along with her 15-year-old daughter. “So while we in Hong Kong can still speak [out], we must represent the voice of the Chinese people and remind the world of this injustice.”
For all its power, China’s government is still deeply paranoid. Today, the regime is “stronger on the surface than at any time since the height of Mao’s power, but also more brittle,” Andrew Nathan, a professor of political science at Columbia University, wrote in Foreign Affairs. The people’s loyalty is predicated on wealth accumulation, which will be difficult to sustain. A sputtering economy, widespread environmental pollution, rampant corruption and soaring inequality have all fed public anxieties about Xi’s ability to continue fulfilling the prosperity-for-loyalty bargain.
