In a democracy the people rule.. Unlike an anarchy where there is no ruler.
:) hope this helped!
I believe, keep in mind, believe, he disliked how inconvenient it was and how it wasn't locally set
There have always been conflicts between individual rights and national security interests in democracies. Limits on civil liberties during wartime, including restrictions on free speech, public assembly, and mass detentions, have been the most serious threats to individual freedom. Even in peacetime, counter-terrorist measures including profiling, detention, and exclusion, along with the use of national identification cards, have raised concerns about racism, constitutional violations, and the loss of privacy. With the passage of new anti-terrorist laws after September 11, 2001, these tensions have increased. Supporters of broader governmental powers insist that they are part of the increased security measures necessary to safeguard national security. In contrast, many civil rights groups fear that the infringement upon individual rights is another step in the erosion of democratic civil society.
Wartime measures. The severest restrictions on civil liberties have occurred in times of war. In September 1862, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) suspended the right of habeas corpus in order to allow federal authorities to arrest and detain suspected Confederate sympathizers without arrest warrants or speedy trials. Well aware of the drastic nature of such a step, Lincoln justified it as a necessary wartime measure. After the United States Supreme Court found Lincoln's abrogation of habeas corpus an unconstitutional intrusion on Congressional authority, Congress itself ratified the measure by passing the Habeas Corpus Act in September 1863. Through 1864, about 14,000 people were arrested under the act; about one in seven were detained at length in federal prisons, most on allegations of offering aid to the Confederacy but others on corruption and fraud charges.
Read more: http://www.faqs.org/espionage/In-Int/Intelligence-and-Democracy-Issues-and-Conflicts.html#ixzz4XX37pHRv
Answer:
D. the Union honoring tribal treaties signed with the Confederacy
Explanation:
In The tribal treaties, the confederacy promised to not disturbed the Native's land in exchange for their help during the Civil War.
After the civil war ended, the Union decided no to honor these treaties and forced a lot of tribes to migrated out of their ancestral land.
The union wanted to used the land to provide enough space for railroads development. They wanted a fast method of distribution to deliver products from southern states to mid-norther states.
What is part of ethnic nationalism and separatism is:
-Separatism is defined as "the act of deciding to leave one's nation."
-An aspiration to establish a brand-new nation
-A national or ethnic minority, is further explained below.
<h3>What is nationalism?</h3>
Generally, nationalism is simply defined as loyalty to one's country and its interests, particularly to the exclusion or disadvantage of all other countries' interests.
In conclusion, Separatism is the belief that one's culture, ethnicity, tribe, religion, race, nation, and/or gender should be kept apart from the rest of society.
Read more about nationalism
brainly.com/question/27126152
#SPJ1
