There are multiple answers to that question... Since it seems they expect you to list common factors for the Eastern European dissatisfaction with their communist governments rather than choosing one from a multiple choice list, here are some possible answers:
- Most communist regimes were comprised (and dominated) by small groups of individuals who refused many communist beliefs.
- The economic situation of Eastern European communist countries was really deplorable, and their citizens realized this through the media (TV, newspapers, etc..)
- Certain ideological, religious groups (such as the Polish Catholic Church) provided some leadership to the opposition.
- These countries could not compete with capitalist Western countries in terms of economy and medicine.
- Americans made promises to the new countries after they got rid of communism; letting multi-nationalism take over.
Answer:
The correct answer is:
1) Conteins enforceable rules that apply to everyone.
Explanation:
Freedom in society implies that everyone is subject to the law, including persons who are legislators, law enforcement officials and judges. This is what is known as the rule of law.
The entire situation with the colonies revolting from British control wouldn't have happened without the Seven Years War (of which the section happening in the North American colonies is called the "French and Indian War").
The British only raised taxes, which is the thing that first upset the American Colonies, to pay down the debt from fighting that war.
The British wouldn't have been considering allowing the Catholic settlers from Canada to move into the Ohio Valley and to keep those from the American Colonies out if they hadn't won the war, since Canada would still have been French.
The American colonists would have had less grievances with the British for the way that the leadership of the British armies messed up in the Colonies if the war hadn't happened.
The American colonists wouldn't have had as many experienced combatants and leaders (Washington being a huge one that learned his skill in war fighting for the British) without the earlier war taking place.
Answer:
True
Explanation:
In the Daubert case, The case is tainted because the defendant provided 'expert witness' to give testimony in the favor, but the testimonies that given contradict the common scientific knowledge that is held by scientific community. Even though this happen, the juries still rule in favor of the defendant simply because they brought 'an expert'.
To prevent this from happening again, the supreme court created rule 702 which restrict the type of expert testimonies that are admissible in court.
