1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Salsk061 [2.6K]
3 years ago
12

According to Bolívar, what is the advantage of a hereditary senate?

History
2 answers:
alekssr [168]3 years ago
4 0
Yes, it's A. because it is talking about their presentation of government.
rodikova [14]3 years ago
3 0

according to Bolivar, the advantage of a hereditary senate is : A)It would be devoted to the preservation of the government.

Hereditary senate refers the position of senate that is transferred from family line rather than an election.  At that time, this view of Bolivar was hugely criticized because it opened up an opportunity for a dictatorship government to be created.

You might be interested in
How did religious issues contributed to political unrest in England in the 17th century.
Maurinko [17]
The 17th century was a time of great political and social turmoil in England, marked by civil war and regicide. Matthew White introduces the key events of this period, from the coronation of Charles I to the Glorious Revolution more than 60 years later.
The 17th century was a period of huge political and social upheaval. From an age characterised by the Crown’s tight control of the state, the century witnessed years of war, terror and bloodshed that enveloped the kingdom, as well as the execution of Charles I and the introduction of a republic. Yet all this was again to be overthrown with the restoration of Charles II: a short-lived return to autocratic royal influence finally swept away with the installation of William and Mary as ruling monarchs.

Charles I and notions of absolutism

The origins of the English Civil Wars are firmly rooted in the actions of one man: King Charles I. As a child, Charles was never destined to succeed to the throne. The weak and sickly second son of James I, Charles had lived in the shadow of his elder brother Henry, who was educated in the ways of kingship by his father. All this changed when, in 1612, Henry contracted smallpox and died, suddenly placing Charles as heir to the throne, eventually to be crowned in his own right in 1625. The old king, James I, had been schooled in notions of compromise, forced to negotiate with his nobles on matters of religion and affairs of state. Charles, by contrast, adopted a starkly different approach, believing that his authority alone was supreme and ordained by God: defined by the principle of the ‘Divine Right of Kings’. ‘It is for me to decide how our nation is to be governed’ he wrote; ‘I alone must answer to God for our exercise of the authority he has invested in me’.[1]

Charles I’s absolutism manifested itself at a time of emerging self-confidence among the English elite. Though Parliament met only sporadically during this period – and acted mainly in an advisory role to the sovereign – by the time Charles was crowned he was already highly dependent on the gentry’s ability to raise adequate tax revenues (derived from agricultural rents, which far exceeded any other sources of income). It was this body of landowning gentlemen that constituted the bulk of Members of Parliament, men who, in theory, could by withholding his sources of income, hold the king to account. Conflict between Crown and Parliament arose for a number of reasons. In matters of religion Charles appeared to disregard the Protestant settlement secured by Henry VIII, favouring instead the Catholic mass and, in 1625, marrying a Catholic member of the French nobility, Henrietta Maria. Charles also continued to act unilaterally in matters of foreign policy and, in the face of criticism levelled by his chief advisers, dissolved Parliament in 1629. Parliament would not meet again for another 11 years.

Without Parliament to sanction his financial needs, Charles found himself in increasingly difficult circumstances. Rebellion in Scotland (provoked by Charles’s insensitive imposition of a new prayer book) required that additional revenues be raised in order to finance a military response. Reluctantly, the king convened a new Parliament in 1640.

The new Parliament that met that year was at once openly hostile to the Crown. MPs complained bitterly about the imposition of taxes and the blatant disregard of religious toleration in the north. (The Scots had rejected Charles’s prayer book and drafted a National Covenant in defiance of the king, resisting his religious reforms in favour of a simpler form of Protestant worship.) Sensing weakness in Charles’s position, key concessions were demanded from the king, and personal attacks were launched against his key ministers. Among them, Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, was to suffer the death penalty for what Parliament labelled acts of treason against the Scottish nation. A botched attempt to arrest five MPs for treason set the king directly in conflict with his people. The scene was set for civil war.

A nation at war

Fearing for his own safety, in 1642 Charles fled London, first heading north to where he believed his main support lay. At Hull, the king was refused entry to the city by the Lord Mayor, and later that year, in Nottingham, Charles raised his royal standard: the first symbol of open warfare with Parliament.

On 23 October 1642 the first true battle of the Civil Wars took place, at Edgehill in Warwickshire, resulting in stalemate between Parliamentarian and Royalist forces. For four years afterwards skirmishing and warfare erupted across the nation, as Roundheads (labelled for the Parliamentarians’ short cropped hair) and Cavaliers (a derogatory term describing the courtly dress of Royalists) pitched themselves against each other.
3 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
98 POINTS AND BRAINLIEST PLEASE HELP ME QUICKLY!!.
ser-zykov [4K]
*I don’t have your reading material, so I’m going off of reading material I’ve read in the past

I choose and agree with Cleisthenes. He believed in democracy unlike Aristotle. He believed that the government should ran fairly and that aristocratic families should not have so much power over the majority, and wanted to prevent another era of tyranny at all cost, thus the reason he is name the “Father of Democracy “.

Before the Cleisthenes the Athens government was dominated by tyranny, he reformed their constitution and added public participation.

You can use this as a rough draft or something, or take some ideas you find useful. You’re welcome.
7 0
3 years ago
During the US occupation of Japan after World War II, Japan’s military was
Ede4ka [16]
I am fairly sure it is D. I remember learning the chant "The US wanted to demilitarize and democratize Japan".
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What is the link between polygamy and the dawn of agriculture
olganol [36]
<span>The dawn of agriculture made people to move around anywhere when they were following animals for food. Because of constant relocation, simple shelters were constructed and occupied by different individuals of all genders and ages. Sometimes, you end waking up with someone unknown beside you.</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Which two questions best capture the debate that exists over the "general welfare" of the public?
Ann [662]

Answer:

A AND B

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which describes why other peoples most likely moved into Bantu territory?
    14·1 answer
  • What was the result of the trinity test in 1945? Scientists persuaded the us to use the bomb on germany. Japan was convinced to
    12·2 answers
  • What does foreshadowing provide the readers in the story
    5·2 answers
  • 2 Points
    15·2 answers
  • Why did President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill want to create the Declaration on Liberated Europe? They wanted to make
    10·2 answers
  • Question down below, much appreciated!
    13·2 answers
  • What where the 4 cash crops?​
    14·1 answer
  • Plz i need help its not c or a
    13·2 answers
  • When did the United States’ new government create its Bill of Rights?
    12·1 answer
  • For how many years did the Crusades last?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!