Both presidentialism and parliamentarism are unequivocally democratic, but each of these regimes leads to different political consequences.
The great difference is that in parliamentarism the executive branch is composed of a president or a monarch, head of state, with limited powers, and a government appointed by Parliament, which at any time can censor. In presidentialism, however, the head of state and government coincide in the same person, are not subject to parliamentary censure and the Legislative Branch is limited to the area of law making.
Therefore, in presidentialism, voters elect the head of government (who in turn is head of state); instead, in parliamentarism, the head of government is appointed by the head of state, who is voted by the people.
Answer:
A I think so pretty much kinda took long
It was really bad, a lot of poverty and it was real dirty and a bad famine too, so in result hitler and the nazis started WWII
Answer:
The answer is option D.
Many people did not want an absolute monarchy.
Explanation: The Congress of Vienna was the meeting of the European leaders from the European countries in 1814-1815. Although this meeting was mainly leaded by the Austria, Britain, Prussia, Russia and Bourbon french. However the main goal was to establish a long term peace treaty by establishing the balance of power between the countries and also determining the land boundary issues. But the Congress also wanted to restore the Monarchy in the France which was overthrown by Napoleon and that angered many people.Because many people did not want an absolute monarchy in France. Napoleon strengthened his revolt again. However he was defeated finally in the Waterloo.
At the end the Congress of Vienna was able establish a peace treaty among the European countries but it has pushed the revolt in France by trying to restore Monarchy.
No, I believe that multiple weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation would have hurt America in time. One of the biggest problems was the lack of detail and specific attributes that the Constitution brings from long discussion and debates over what is best for the country. America needed to strengthen it's central government if it wanted to get anywhere, so we may not have become so powerful if we left the majority of the power in the state's hands. Another lacking component was the fact that we had no Executive branch to enforce Congress' laws and no National court to determine the meaning of the laws. Another example is the making of one currency for the entire country. These examples and more could have hurt America if they wouldn't have written the Constitution.
