Answer:
The Townshend Acts were a series of measures, passed by the British Parliament in 1767, that taxed goods imported to the American colonies. But American colonists, who had no representation in Parliament, saw the Acts as an abuse of power. The British sent troops to America to enforce the unpopular new laws, further heightening tensions between Great Britain and the American colonies in the run-up to the American Revolutionary War.
The British Crown emerged victorious from the French and Indian War in 1763, but defending the North American colonies from French expansion had proved tremendously costly to England.
Compared to Great Britain’s debts, the cost of the French and Indian War to the colonists had been slight. The colonists—who arguably enjoyed a higher standard of living at the time than their British counterparts—paid less than one-twentieth the taxes of British citizens living in England.
The British government thought the colonists should help pay the cost of their protection. The British Parliament enacted a series of taxes on the colonies for the purpose of raising revenue. Early attempts, such as the Stamp Act of 1765—which taxed colonists for every piece of paper they used—were met with widespread protests in America.
Explanation:
A city state or an empire would be easier to rule because of its smaller size
<span>One answer might be that culture, an exclusive, frivolous, leisure pursuit of the rich, their flunkies, and social climbers, requires elaborate security to defend its providers and consumers from the righteous anger of the people, whose hard-earned taxes, or lottery losses, are squandered on subsidising fripperies such as opera, ballet, theatre, concerts, and art shows with dead cows in aspic, to which la-di-dah people wear fancy clothes. Another, from the opposite side of the social divide, might say that cultural performances and artefacts embody the best in the spirit of the nation, thus belong to all the people, irrespective of who owns or attends them, and are a source of pride and prestige for all, which must be defended against attack by foreigners, terrorists, hooligans, and madmen. The former is the view of philistines, the latter that of culture vultures.</span>
The Helsinki Accords were primarily an effort to reduce tension between the Soviet and Western blocs by securing their common acceptance of the post-World War II status quo in Europe. ... The Helsinki Accords are nonbinding and do not have treaty status.
Answer:
The only answer that makes sense here is C.
Explanation:
In the first place, the question seems not be well formulated. The rise of Napoleon was an event of post-revolutionary France. His astonishing military victories made him the master of Europe and brought a lot of glory to his country. Despite being a monarch himself, an autocrat, he embraced republican ideas and many of the high ideals of the revolution. He promulgated his famous codes, he promoted French ideals in the vanquished countries. France stood as an example, as a torch of liberty for many future Latin American independence fighters who were fed up with tyrannical and decadent Spanish rule. Some of them even fought in the Napoleonic armies, persuaded that by doing so, they contribute to spreading human liberty and progress.
