Answer:
b. Critics of the government were murdered or imprisoned.
Explanation:
Here is an in-depth explanation for my answer. These have neither dates nor real evidence to back them up, so you will have to find any sources to back up my claims on your own. You're also free to disagree or edit my take of Stalin's totalitarianism; my aim here is just to give a starting point for you to build off of and make your own.
a. Peasants owned land that they could farm.
- Communism and really socialism as a whole brought forth an idea that there should be no privately owned land; any and all land was owned by the federal government, and people simply used it. So, even with little historical knowledge on Stalinism, we can assume this answer is incorrect.
b. Critics of the government were murdered or imprisoned.
- Under Stalinism, there was no room for critique of government. Any party leaders and any critics of Stalinism with goals set on exposing corruption and flaws in current Soviet society were later found dead or jailed, peasants were imprisoned and put into forced labor if they went against the state and also sometimes killed off if they were thought of as spies. In the end, Stalin attempted complete removal of any opposition he may have faced, and used fear tactics to control the Soviet Union as its dictator.
c. Voters could choose between candidates from two political parties.
- Voters could not find any candidats that weren't already killed off by Stalin, so there was no one to vote for other than Stalin himself. Sure, they could vote, but there wasn't a political party other than Stalin's that could grab the brainwashed public's vote.
d. The government set up a court system based on truth and justice.
- If there was a court system to be found in the Soviet Union at the time, it was so unnoteworthy it may as well have not existed in the first place. The "court system" under Stalin rule was basically just an extension of Stalin's power, and Stalin always made sure that any decision was made with his consent or with his consent in mind.
Answer;
A.
Sylvia retains her loyalty to nature as her affection for the hunter grows.
<span>Sylvia struggles between protecting the heron and gaining the money.
Sylvia doesn't really care about money at all. There is an ambivalence in Sylvia because she could benefit from the money but it would be at the expense of the heron with which she empathizes.</span>
In 494 BC the plebians detached and formed their own plebian council. they elected tribunes to protect their rights; with the tribunes they could not vote against unjust laws passed by patricians/the senate. the citizen assembly elected consuls, tribunes, and magistrates, could declare war and ratify peace treaties, and could approve or disapprove laws proposed by the Senate. They created laws that said patricians could no longer rule unjustly against them. Debt bondage was gone, priesthood was available, plebians could be in the Senate - but laws of the Senate apply to all while the citizen assembly's laws only apply to the plebians. (youre lucky im in class w/ my notebook rn lol)
I believe the answer is kennedy
