Answer:
Both laws have striking similarities, but they also exhibit other differences as explained in the following
Explanation:
Both laws have striking similarities, but there are also vast differences. And the differences show how one is far superior to the other.
In the similarities both are sets of laws designed to help society function in ways so that it could prosper, and these laws contained particular civil rights.
They both share in the protection of marriage, family, property damage, injury, murder, robbery, theft, kidnapping and even in commerce, so they both act as stabilizers of society.
Here are some differences between both.
The source of the Book of the hebrew Covenant is God; the source for the Hammurabi laws is Hammurabi the Babylonian king in ancient Mesopotamia. The hebrew Covenant protects the disenfranchised members of society, regardless of their place or rank in society, while the Code of Hammurabi is interested only in the free men class and gives special protection to the middle and higher social classes of Babylon. Another difference was the fact that God was interested in creating a kingdom of priests, a holy nation in the hebrew law, but Hammurabi’s motivation is for prosperity and longevity on the throne.
C) Israel and Judah hope it helps
The state government does. They can make laws about your property, age of smoking and drinking, and driving/driver’s license laws and regulations!
The "Great Leap Forward" is the name of the plan started by the Communist government of China that attempted to rapidly industrialize their economy in the late 1950s.
<u>Explanation:</u>
The Great Leap Forward was the social and economic program during 1958 to 1962 of the People's Republic of China's (PRC's) by the Communist Party of China (CPC) counted as second 5 year plan. This initiative was flagged by Mao Zedong as a movement to transform the nation from an agrarian economy to a socialist society by establishing communes of the citizens.
The movement for the faster growth of the industrial and agricultural industries in China must be initiated in parallel. The objective was to eliminate importing heavy machinery by permitting use of the vast supply of cheap workers.The authorities also wanted to escape the social stratification as well as the technological bottlenecks embedded in the Soviet growth model, but found political instead of technical solutions.