<span>Remember, at the time, it was the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Empire (unlike any of the other major states in Europe) was a patchwork of over a dozen major ethnic groups. Nationalism tends to organize along ethnic boundaries (that is, nations tend to form around a large concentration of one ethnic group). Thus, with a very large number of different ethnic groups, the Empire had to worry about each group wanting to split from the Empire, and form its own nation. Indeed, after WW1, this is what happened to the Empire - it was split into about a 8 different countries (or, more accurately, portions of 8 countries included lands formerly part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire).</span>
I believe that the two answers would be A and C.
Answer:
Philip Danforth Armour
Explanation:
He founded the meatpacking company "Armour and Company" in Chicago in 1867, which matches the American businessman and 19th century parts of your question. I hope this helps!
Answer:
No, they would not have been able to legalize recreational marihuana.
Explanation:
This is because, in an unitary system, administrative divisions like Georgia or Colorado have very few powers, and certainly, they do not have any legislative powers.
All legislation emerges from the central government in an unitary system, and this means that if the U.S. was an unitary system, the law to legalize recreational marihuana would have to come, exclusively, from the U.S. Congress.
Unless the U.S. Congress legalized marihuana nationwide, no state would be allowed to do so under an unitary system. it would continue to be prohibited.
