Answer:
The Federalists wanted to ratify the Constitution, the Anti-Federalists did not. One of the major issues these two parties debated concerned the inclusion of the Bill of Rights. The Federalists felt that this addition wasn't necessary, because they ... they eventually made the concession and announced a willingness to take up
Explanation:
Answer:
The answer is detailed in the explanation;
Explanation:
<u><em>
Dear Sir, Jhon Locke;
</em></u>
With my sincere words I do not intend to change his ideals of reform but I do intend to be heard on the basis of the experience of the human being and what characterizes him, it is well known that the man without law is an irrational being incapable of restraining his impulses and actions Likewise, ambition, greed for power causes divisions and doubts to be sown and the fracture of power occurs, that is why an absolute monarchy where absolute power and responsibility falls on only that supreme being already chosen of impartial way to impartially govern all kinds of people without any preference to either side, for me it is and surely being the ideal form of government.
<em><u>Respected Sir; Thomas hobbe
:</u></em>
Considering his arguments, I find a heartfelt contradiction; if the power corrupts the human being who by natural tendency is given to ambition and greed; How can absolute power and responsibility be left to govern and educate an entire people in the hands of one man?
Really, in an absolute monarchy there is no freedom, there is no democracy, we need to work as a team to help each other to balance power, although it is true that two heads think more than one, being in a position of responsibility and knowing that we have that answering for our acts before the laws or branches of power causes us to be more cautious when making decisions that could affect our nation, our actions have consequences and a bad control of absolute power undoubtedly brings total chaos.
Answer:
A global catastrophic risk is a hypothetical future event which could damage human well-being on a global scale,[2] even endangering or destroying modern civilization.[3] An event that could cause human extinction or permanently and drastically curtail humanity's potential is known as an existential risk.[4]
Artist's impression of a major asteroid impact. An asteroid with an impact strength of a billion atomic bombs may have caused the extinction of the dinosaurs.[1]
Potential global catastrophic risks include anthropogenic risks, caused by humans (technology, governance, climate change), and non-anthropogenic or external risks.[3] Examples of technology risks are hostile artificial intelligence and destructive biotechnology or nanotechnology. Insufficient or malign global governance creates risks in the social and political domain, such as a global war, including nuclear holocaust, bioterrorism using genetically modified organisms, cyberterrorism destroying critical infrastructure like the electrical grid; or the failure to manage a natural pandemic. Problems and risks in the domain of earth system governance include global warming, environmental degradation, including extinction of species, famine as a result of non-equitable resource distribution, human overpopulation, crop failures and non-sustainable agriculture.
Examples of non-anthropogenic risks are an asteroid impact event, a supervolcanic eruption, a lethal gamma-ray burst, a geomagnetic storm destroying electronic equipment, natural long-term climate change, hostile extraterrestrial life, or the predictable Sun transforming into a red giant star engulfing the Earth.
Answer:
People were frightened by the event, but there was no physical harm.
Explanation:
Answer:
economic policies because of president Jackson
Explanation:
