The distinction that Thomas Paine, author of <em>Common Sense</em>, is making between nations and courts is that nations exist to ensure citizen welfare while courts are set up to cater for the nobles' interests and lifestyles.
<h3>Who is Thomas Paine?</h3>
Thomas Paine was the English-American writer of Common Sense, which galvanized the American Revolution. Thomas Paine urged American colonists to be wary of the allures of courts and royalty in order to develop a modern democratic nation.
Thus, the distinction that Thomas Paine makes between nations and courts is that nations look after the people's welfare while courts are centered on the nobles.
Learn more about Thomas Paine at brainly.com/question/141727
King Authur believed sir Pellinore was a great adversary and that they can work togethor to take back the Holy Lands
The new constitution created by these moderate revolutionaries declared france to be a new constitutional monarchy. within this new government, all legislative powers went to a single legislative assembly, which alone had the power to declare war and raise taxes. the legislative assembly was an indirectly elected body.
Answer: “Birth of a Nation”—D. W. Griffith’s disgustingly racist yet titanically original 1915 feature—back to the fore. The movie, set mainly in a South Carolina town before and after the Civil War, depicts slavery in a halcyon light, presents blacks as good for little but subservient labor, and shows them, during Reconstruction, to have been goaded by the Radical Republicans into asserting an abusive dominion over Southern whites. It depicts freedmen as interested, above all, in intermarriage, indulging in legally sanctioned excess and vengeful violence mainly to coerce white women into sexual relations. It shows Southern whites forming the Ku Klux Klan to defend themselves against such abominations and to spur the “Aryan” cause overall. The movie asserts that the white-sheet-clad death squad served justice summarily and that, by denying blacks the right to vote and keeping them generally apart and subordinate, it restored order and civilization to the South.
“Birth of a Nation,” which runs more than three hours, was sold as a sensation and became one; it was shown at gala screenings, with expensive tickets. It was also the subject of protest by civil-rights organizations and critiques by clergymen and editorialists, and for good reason: “Birth of a Nation” proved horrifically effective at sparking violence against blacks in many cities. Given these circumstances, it’s hard to understand why Griffith’s film merits anything but a place in the dustbin of history, as an abomination worthy solely of autopsy in the study of social and aesthetic pathology.
D. They led small, surprise attacks on British troops.
