Yes,
oligarchy fits as a description of South African government under the system of apartheid. In the
political philosophy of Aristotle, "
aristocracy" is "rule by the excellent ones," and in certain eras of history or in some societies, one group or another has been portrayed as more "excellent" and thus more favorable for serving as governors. In Aristotle's political thought, an
"oligarchy" or "rule by a few" is a corruption of the idea of aristocracy. But Aristotle was biased, believing that by nature some persons are more excellent than others, that some are more suited by nature to be followers, not leaders. (Aristotle used such logic in defending the institution of slavery, for instance.) Today,
we might argue that any sort of "aristocracy" or elitism is always an oligarchy, an arbitrary system in which a few dominate over the many because of factors that can't rationally be defended.For another answer on a similar question, read more on Brainly.com -
brainly.com/question/9475348#readmore
<span>B. They did away with feudalism however paid the ruling class, and changed the social classes.</span>
It did not bring to an end the tremendous injustices that African Americans had to suffer on a day-to-day basis, and some of its activities, such as the work of the Federal Housing Administration, served to build rather than break down the walls of segregation that separated black from white in Jim Crow America. Yet as Mary McLeod Bethune once noted, the Roosevelt era represented “the first time in their history” that African Americans felt that they could communicate their grievances to their government with the “expectancy of sympathetic understanding and interpretation.” Indeed, it was during the New Deal, that the silent, invisible hand of racism was fully exposed as a national issue; as a problem that at the very least needed to be recognized; as something the county could no longer pretend did not exist.
The bottom right image of the novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin" reminds me of the uproar caused 9 years before the war. The north and south both opinionated stances on the acceptance of the book due to its contents.
The top left shows The Liberator newspaper, a widely circulated anti-slavery newspaper that continued publishing throughout the war. It bashed the Constitution and went as far as calling it a pro-slavery document.
Answer:
Huh, I don't understand this language-
Explanation:
