Answer: Locke and Rousseau would be most likely to support a <u>change of government brought about by the people</u>.
You might say this means they would support a <u>revolution</u> by the people against a bad government ... and to an extent that is true. We might want to be cautious, however, in ascribing too much revolutionary fervor to either of those two philosophers. Both of them were writing philosophy about how the people should be the sovereign power in a state -- that a government gets its power from the people and needs to serve the interests of the people. So in theory, they support the people's right to remove a government that has become tyrannical and replace it with a government that works properly on behalf of the people. But neither Locke nor Rousseau was personally advocating violent revolution. American colonists took up arms against Britain in response to their sort of philosophy (especially Locke's). And the bourgeoisie in France started the movement that became the French Revolution based on thoughts in both Lock and Rousseau. But as Enlightenment thinkers, both men ideally hoped to convince others by means of their arguments that a constitutional form of government was the best idea (Locke), or even that direct democracy was the right way for a state to operate (Rousseau).
Answer:
we can understand the kind and humble nature of Prithvi Narayan shah can be felt when he has followed the advice of Bise Nagarchi. We can also comprehend that he is a far-sighted person and respect others even though he was a king.
Even though I am late, the correct answer would be C, The transition from slave labor to wage labor in the South. I just took a test and that was the right answer (If its not I'm sorry)
<span>Because prices rose and the government could only afford less food and supplies.
hope that helped</span>
