The crafters of the United States constitution wanted a system of government wherein the people had a voice in their ruling but at the same time, the crafters were worried that the people would rule like a mob without checks and that the majority would persecute the minorities in the country.
Both the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists agreed that there were dangers inherent in the system, which is why the crafters created a system with checks and balances on the lawmaking process and a bicameral legislature with a body, the US Senate, whose job is to ensure that cooler heads always prevail.
This shows the influence of thinkers like Edmund Burke, a British philosopher, who advocated for incremental change.
The cost of this is that things do move slowly and sometimes the legislatures misses the ball. The response to this has been a stronger Executive branch with the power to create temporary executive orders but the process is still slow.
The benefit is an incremental system that has lasted longer than any system of Government in the world.
The question is whether or not America's system can adequately work in a time when new challenges and threats are coming every minute.
Answer:
Well, first you'll have to identify themes of their rule.
Style of rule -
NII was obviously an autocrat (even though he, in theory anyway, had a representative body of the peoples, the Duma. But he hung onto his absolute rule with the Fundamental Laws (1905)), and Lenin had spoke alot of 'dictatorship of the proletariat,' both pretty absolute.
Repression (secret police, censorship) -
NII had the Okhrana, and tried to continue his father's 'Reaction.' Secret police for the
purpose of preserving the status quo, keeping the Tsars in power.
Lenin's Cheka was far more efficient, and though the total amount of the Cheka's victims in the civil war are officially 12,000 and something(wiki it), historians widely believe this figure to be in excess 500,000. Lenin therefore could be judged as the worse of the two.
Reform -
- NII - Illusory Reform (October Manifesto created the Duma, and as mentioned, this had no real authority),
- Stolypin's land reforms did almost nothing. Lenin issues the Workers Control Decree, and also
- the Bolshevik Land Decree - however these were only very temporary (before a return to a very
- authoritarian economic set-up (strict discipline etc). These therefore could also be judged as illusory.
Similarities-
- Both used concessions/reform in order to maintain control. Nicholas with the October Manifesto and
the creation of the Duma and Lenin with the NEP to appease the SR's and the rightists of the Bolsheviks.
- They both 'backtracked' on the reforms however with Lenin calling the NEP a 'tactical retreat' and would've
- reverted it had he been alive and Nicholas made the 1906 constitution/ Fundamental laws which limited the Duma's powers and maintained his position as an autocrat.
The best and most correct answer among the choices provided by the question is the first choice "Innocent people should not be denied guns just because criminals use them illegally."
Under this "individual right theory<span>," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional.</span>
I hope my answer has come to your help. God bless and have a nice day ahead!
Not sure I’m sorry I couldn’t help
