Answer:
Enlightenment thinkers argued that liberty was a natural human right and that reason and scientific knowledge—not the state or the church—were responsible for human progress. But Enlightenment reason also provided a rationale for slavery, based on a hierarchy of races.
Explanation:
<span>Minamoto Yoshitsune, led his clan to victory against the Taira near the village of Dan-no-ura.
</span>
Due to the rise of industrialism, the north was mostly comprised by factories. In addition, white men in the north were literate at a higher rate than men in the South. Men in the north tended to be businessmen, scientists, etc (i.e. professionals as opposed to plantation owners/farmers like in the south). The south had a higher rate of illiteracy than the north, and was deeply influenced by an economy that depended on slavery and agriculture to thrive.
Your questions pertain to the "Interest Groups" segment of the Annenberg-Learner series, <em>Democracy in America.
</em>Crusader was an artillery system being developed by the US military, being built by a company called United Defense. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wanted to go in a different, more streamlined and cost-efficient direction with the military. But Rumsfeld's plan to cancel the Crusader program ran into problems with the "iron triangle" of the army itself, the defense industry (represented here by the United Defense company), and members of Congress who challenged the cancellation of the project.
Members of Congress came to the defense of the Crusader project by United Defense both for the sake of jobs in home districts and because they saw the plans to cancel Crusader as a quick decision from the top (the Secretary of Defense) without proper consideration and analysis by other members of government.
In the end, a compromise was worked out in which the full Crusader project was ended, but the contractor, United Defense, retained $475 million dollars to continue development of the Crusader's cannon. So the "iron triangle" lost this particular battle, in a sense, but maintained power in the ongoing "war" over how defense spending is decided.
