It could mean many things but the most common explanation is to own up to your mistakes. to not walk around looking for someone else to blame. It depends on how it's used in context though.
Answer:
try searching for it on the NYT or brittaica they are both very reliable
Explanation:
Answer:
<em>He declared himself emperor and first citizen</em>
Explanation:
-Spain- gold, silver, new goods (Columbian exchange), intense catholic missionaries, didn't heavily colonize (Gold, God, Glory); conquistadors
Pizarro- silver mines at Potosi became spain's wealth for next 100 years
Cortes
just wanted to maintain empire bc after 1588 spanish armada, fell into decline
-Britain wanted to expand royal government in colonies, not as focused on bullionism or conversion. Jamestown, joint stock company
North and South Carolina: charter by king charles
<span>France- expand the fur trade, native population, catholic missionaries. </span>
Cartier in canada
Marquette in MS river
Champlain had friendly relations w natives
<span>Courier dubois live among indians- have better relations w/ indians </span>
Corporate personhood is the legal notion that a corporation, separately from its associated human beings (like owners, managers, or employees), has at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons (physical humans).[1] In the United States and most countries, corporations have a right to enter into contracts with other parties and to sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. In a U.S. historical context, the phrase 'Corporate Personhood' refers to the ongoing legal debate over the extent to which rights traditionally associated with natural persons should also be afforded to corporations. A headnote issued by the Court Reporter in the 1886 Supreme Court case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. claimed to state the sense of the Court regarding the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as it applies to corporations, without the Court having actually made a decision or issued a written opinion on that point. This was the first time that the Supreme Court was reported to hold that the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause granted constitutional protections to corporations as well as to natural persons, although numerous other cases, since Dartmouth College v. Woodward in 1819, had recognized that corporations were entitled to some of the protections of the Constitution. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 exempted Hobby Lobby from aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act because those aspects placed a substantial burden on the closely held company's owners' exercise of free religion.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
