La respuesta correcta para esta pregunta abierta es la siguiente.
Aunque no se incluyan opciones o incisos para responder la pregunta, podemos decir lo siguiente.
Sí, tuvieron carácter reformista las medidas educativas implementadas por Bolívar. Y no solamente fueron medidas educativas, sino políticas y sociales.
A Simón Bolívar se le conoce como el gran Libertador de América. Él fue una de las figuras clave en la lucha por la independencia de algunas naciones sudamericanas, como lu fue el caso de su natal Venezuela y ayudó a liberarse del yugo de la monarquía Española a Colombia, Ecuador, Perú, y Bolivia.
Para Simón Bolívar, el poder público de una nación debería estar dividido en un Congreso Constitucional que tuviera dos cámaras legislativas, y entre ellas, generar las leyes justas que regirían el acontecer nacional de un país.
Para Bolívar, la cámara de Diputados y una Cámara de Senadores deberían existir para representar los intereses legítimos del pueblo, ya que el poder público se debe a la voluntad del pueblo, quien es el beneficiado directo de un gobierno justo y libre.
He kept asking for more land until the European nations realized what they had done.
Answer:
Explanation:
to defend the collective security of member states
Ivan the terrible was (1) a patron of arts and trade, founder of the Moscow Print Yard, Russia's first publishing house; (2) he is also remembered for his paranoia and arguably harsh treatment of the Russian nobility. The Massacre of Novgorod is regarded as one of the biggest demonstrations of his mental instability and brutality. (3) <span>Ivan managed countless changes in the progression from a medieval state to an empire and emerging regional power, and he became the first ruler to be crowned as Tsar of All the Russias.</span>
<span>The key to your question is the fact that you asked if the U.S. government had "no involvement" in the 9-11 tragedy. Most people seem to jump to the polar opposite sides in this debate. Either you believe the government planned and committed the assault, or you think that everyone of that opinion is a crackpot and believe the government's explanations about what happened that day. I think the answer is somewhere in between. I find it difficult to believe that the U.S. government would plan an attack of that magnitude on its own people because there's far too much to lose. There's no doubt that there'd be a full-scale revolution by the people if the government was proven to be the masterminds of the event. In fact, you probably wouldn't even have to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. If enough evidence came out to make it look very likely, there'd be a very serious problem in the U.S.. Having said that, there are too many questions that have not been answered by the government - or the answers that they've provided are very weak and unbelievable. What makes matters worse is that the government has been attacking those who ask questions, linking all doubters to terrorist sympathizers. That kind of attack on free speech is dangerous and should never be trusted. I've always had a funny feeling that the 9-11 attacks are a combination of terrorist hatred for the U.S. and corruption by the Bush administration. I think that the terrorists hijacked planes and intended to hit the World Trade Center. I also believe that the government knew that the attack was coming, but did nothing about it. The attack gave the U.S. an excuse to expand its military and political activities in the middle east.</span>
