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
elena-14-01-66 [18.8K]
2 years ago
6

These speakers are debating the form of government their country should take:

History
2 answers:
Triss [41]2 years ago
7 0

Answer:

The correct Answer is A: Speaker 2 is advocating for Anarchy in the country                      

Explanation:

Anarchy is defined as the state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority, other controlling systems or governments.

The word was coined in 1953 and was used then to mean "an absence of government"

Anarchism holds the state to be unwanted, irrelevant, or harmful.

Immanuel Kant, a philosopher of gernam origins treated anarchy in his <em>Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View</em> as consisting of "Law and Freedom without Force".

He posits that anarchy falls short of being a true civil state because the law is only an "empty recommendation" if force is not included to make this law effective.

Kant identified four kinds of government:

  1.    Law and freedom without force (anarchy)
  2.    Law and force without freedom (despotism)
  3.    Force without freedom and law (barbarism)
  4.    Force with freedom and law (republic)

Cheers!

lawyer [7]2 years ago
3 0
There are too many speakers
You might be interested in
Develop four hypothesis of different ways to end the war with Japan. Be sure the suggestions are realistic and reflect the perio
Snezhnost [94]
One option can be a full military campaign based on sending soldiers to take Japanese territory. One advantage is that the number of killed civilians would be drastically lower while another would be that nuclear weaponry would not be used and would not destroy the environment. Disadvantage would be the high amount of soldier casualties and another can be possibly a very lengthy war effort.

Another option could be a complete blockade of Japan. Since it's an island, it would be possible to blockade it from all sides and wait for Japanese people to surrender since they wouldn't be able to sustain for long without importing things. One advantage would be preventing the death of Japanese civilians and preventing deaths of US troops. Disadvantages would be that might actually endure hardships and still wouldn't surrender, and another could be that they might fight like guerrillas and attack ships and American troops

Another option can be an allied assault in which the US could attack together with Soviets and split Japan like Germany. Advantage would be reduced amount of killed Japanese civilians and reduced amount of killed American troops. The disadvantage could be that a split Japan would be problematic like split Germany was because of Communism, and another could be that it would enable soviets to spread their influence even more throughout Asia

Fourth option could be having a demonstration of the power of nuclear weaponry somewhere safe. The United States could show what they are capable of in order to scare Japan into surrender. One advantage is that Japanese civilians would not be harmed and another can be that they would still show the world how strong the United States bombs are. One disadvantage could be that Japanese people might still not surrender since there were many who wanted to stay in the war even after the two nukes, and another disadvantage could be that Japan might began preparing for nuclear warfare since they would now know what awaits them

The best possible option could be as a recommendation the naval blockade. If a naval blockade was combined with bombardment of strategic military areas then Japan would inevitably surrender even though it would take a few months at least. It would cost a lot but it would save the lives of many people who didn't have to suffer because of their government.
5 0
3 years ago
Why did the nationalists and communists unite forces in 1926?
Bond [772]
The Chinese Nationalists and the Chinese Communists united forces in 1926 to defeat the various war lords throughout the countryside of China who were keeping China in a state of semi-feudal anarchy.

One year later, Jiang Jie-Shi (CKS) and the Nationalists would stab the communists in the back in Shanghai, starting what would be a 20+ year-long civil war.
3 0
3 years ago
Why did Missouri's request to join the United States in 1820 caused a crisis?
Over [174]
The answer is C) adding Missouri would increase the power of free states in Congress
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Well-educated people during the Renaissance learned
Aleksandr [31]
<span>Classical Latin.

/2short</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Which state produced a
Tomtit [17]

Answer:

Hartford, Connecticut: The Fundamental Orders

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What happens if the factors of production in an economic system are wasted?
    13·1 answer
  • What was the effect of so much trade in Byzantium?
    5·1 answer
  • The rich man never dances badly,whose prove is this?
    9·1 answer
  • Telemachus recognizes Athena when she visits him in Ithaca. True False
    7·2 answers
  • Why is the french and Indian war significant?
    13·1 answer
  • direct involvement by one nation in the affairs of another A.urbanization B.sectionalism or C.interventon
    5·2 answers
  • The was part of Stalin’s secret police force.
    12·2 answers
  • What do these disagreements reveal about the changing relationship between the United States and the USSR?
    13·2 answers
  • In at least two complete sentences describe to me what the facsist dictatorship is
    10·1 answer
  • Que efecto tienen los huracanes en los océanos
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!