1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
nevsk [136]
4 years ago
5

the difference between Declaration of Independence and the Constitution is the Declaration state schools for philosophy and Cons

titution puts ideas into action true or false
History
2 answers:
melomori [17]4 years ago
8 0

i believe correct answer is FALSE

rusak2 [61]4 years ago
6 0

The correct answer is true.

It is true that the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution is the Declaration states goals or philosophy and the Constitution puts ideas into action.

The Declaration states the motives why the United States demanded independence from the British crown. It enumerates the reasons and grievances committed by the government of England. In the case of the Constitution, the delegated that met at the Constitutional Convention in the city of Philadephia, Pennsylvania, came up with the new form of government that the United States needed. So yes, they put ideas into action.

You might be interested in
How were eastern europeans affected by communism after ww2?
LenKa [72]
Simply put, by coercion.

There was a very simple process that followed:

(1) the Red Army invades the countries, on the pretext of "liberating" them - this gives a plausible veneer to a treacherous end;

(2) whilst occupying, Soviet commissars would prop up the local communist party (typically, enjoying only minimal support from the country's population, unless also nationalist) - this is so as to have a puppet regime-in-waiting;

(3) under Soviet occupation, typically some sort of a "referendum" or "plebiscite" will be held, at which SUDDENLY the voters will "decide" to abolish the previous constitution and to enact one that practically gives sole powers to the local communists - this is to give the effective coup d'etat a veneer of legitimacy;

(4) once installed in power, the communist party will effectively take over the machinery of state by staffing all key posts with its members;

(5) through the use of secret police and kangaroo courts, opposition, incl. those of the original governing class who did not have the good sense to escape, will be physically eliminated, sentenced to long prison terms, exiled, otherwise incarcerated;

(6) a the takeover of the state is usually followed by a takeover, through nationalisation or outright confiscation, of the economy, giving the regime financial muscle;

<span>(7) the established position will be upheld by the same means it was acquired and with unparalleled degree of ruthlessness, with the country taken over being treated as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kremlin Holdings.</span>
3 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
In the 1935 landmark case of Schechter Poultry vs. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that parts of the New Deal were uncons
Sladkaya [172]

was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated regulations of the poultry industry according to the non-delegation doctrine and as an invalid use of Congress' power under the commerce clause.


-

source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.L.A._Schechter_Poultry_Corp._v._United_States

4 0
4 years ago
Can someone help me?
Sergio039 [100]

Answer:

C, no one was perfect

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
if you were president Jackson, what would you have done about the crisis over nullification?State what you think Jackson should
Ivan

Andrew Jackson was elected president in 1828, partly due to the South’s belief that he would pursue policies more in line with the interests of Southern planters and slaveholders. Indeed, Jackson had chosen John C. Calhoun, a native of South Carolina, as his vice president.^3  

7 0
3 years ago
What’s a different kind of resistance to imperialism in Asia
Nezavi [6.7K]

Answer:

brainliest??

Explanation:

The Imperialism of Southeast Asia was mainly influenced by the amount of trade between India, southeast Asia, and China. Many countries like Great Britain wanted to expand their trade, so colonizing in Southeast Asia allowed them to have safer and more efficient trade routes.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was one of the global effects of the Yom Kippur war?
    9·2 answers
  • Why was japan stripped of overseas territory and military resources after world war ll
    14·1 answer
  • why do you think congress considers bills in committee before they are brought to the floor for debate
    10·1 answer
  • How was iron changed to steel ?
    8·2 answers
  • The congress of industrial organizations developed in response to what
    10·2 answers
  • PLEASE HELP ASAP!!! CORRECT ANSWERS ONLY PLEASE!!!
    9·1 answer
  • YOOO tell me if yhu cant see the answer
    6·1 answer
  • President Abraham Lincoln wanted the North to fight in the civil war in order to
    14·1 answer
  • PLEASE HELP ASAP!!
    12·1 answer
  • Conservative Republicans wanted to use tariffs to protect American industry from
    13·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!