T<span>he Framers of the Constitution divided American government into three branches: the executive, legislative, and judicial. This created a better democracy because the power is not concentrated within one branch or in the hands of a few.
The systems in </span><span>place that protect against one branch having too much power is called "separation of powers" and "checks and balances." This system keeps each branch from getting too powerful by limiting its powers. For example, the legislative branch can pass a law but the president veto it. That's a way the executive branch checks the legislative. And let's say the legislature really wants to pass that law, so they vote on it. With 2/3 majority of votes for the law, Congress can override the president's veto. That's a way the legislative branch checks on the executive. And let's say that although that law was passed by the legislature, some say that it's unconstitutional. If that happens, then the judicial branch checks out the law and can declare it unconstitutional. If it's declared unconstitutional, then the law will be no longer enforced or valid. That's a way the judicial branch checks the other branches.
Other examples of "checks and balances" is how the president is in charge of the armed forces, but only Congress can declare war. The judicial branch interprets laws and their constitutionality, but the president appoint the federal judges. The president appoints the federal judges, but the legislative branch has to approve those officials. The legislative branch also decides how many judges would be in the Supreme Court. The president can veto and the judicial can repeal laws, but the legislature can impeach the president and federal judges/officials.
These systems are important to American democracy because they keep the government from getting too powerful and oppressing the people. </span>
Answer:
Russia
Explanation:
Czar Nicholas II became the ruler of Russia in 1894. However, following his incompetence and heavy losses in the wars he entered in his bid to maintain autocracy such as the Russo-Japanese war in 1905.
The effect led to many things in Russia, such as a scarcity of food, striking of labors, the level of poverty also increased tremendously and the soldiers were tired of unsuccessful war.
He was later removed from his position in 1914.
Few people doubted his legitimacy. Legitimacy in this issue isn't characterized by the mainstream vote, vote tallies, our outrage or individuals quibbling about how the procedure turned out badly. It's characterized by a legitimate procedure that — regardless of the possibility that we contend about regardless of whether the Supreme Court settled on the morally remedy choice—was lawful and inside their domain. He promised of office, the Congress and Executive branch perceived that and hence he was the true blue POTUS. Suppositions on this issue are as unessential as sentiments on the presence of gravity.
Answer:
Explanation: Soldiers' attitudes towards the Great War are a controversial issue, as they ... This topic has sparked many interrogations, and a degree of ... most of the men classified as "deserters" in 1914 were actually living ... But there was also a negative, coercive aspect to the upholding of cohesion and obedience.
