it ensured that careers would be open on the basis of merit and not privileges of birth.
It did not guarantee women equal rights but confirmed the existing supremacy of men over women; women had fewer rights than children.
It didn't either enshrine individual rights or the security of the state- there was a balance
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there were no options attached, we can say the following.
One goal the French and Spanish colonists had in common in the New World was to get rich through the fur trade.
The French in North America did not think about settling or colonized the territory. They wanted to get rich through the fur trade, The French respected most of the Native American Indians and had a decent relationship with them. The Spaniards also participated in the fur trade, although they were more interested in the gold and other raw materials in Mesoamerica and South America.
Answer:
The richest people in the society (like elon musk or the kardashians lol) were called "aristocrats". Over a third of society were women and children, the others were men. Women were considered citizens but were not able to vote. Freeman, men who were not slaves (but were second-class to the common people), were not allowed to vote or participate in government (like run for senate or smt). Freemen made up around 10% of the population. They often were not born in Athens and moved there to find good jobs and make money. Freemen were often craftsmen and merchants. When the economy started going up, the number of merchants increased and trade increased as well. Slaves made up 1/3 of the population, and slaves were mostly prisoners of war (people captured in war). Slaves were considered private property, owned by an individual and not the government.
I just took that test too so the answer is B
<span>I
think that the positives of partisanship is that the incumbent political leader
will have the (1) unwavering support from his cohorts with regards to the
projects, programs or laws that he/she will be implementing (2) their
aspirations and objectives are aligned which helps in catalyzing in the changes
that they may want to implement in the government or administration and (3) its
identity can endure simply because it is strengthened by affiliating itself to
gender, ethnic, religious and racial groups thus promoting a connection to a
party which eventually generates political stability and diminish political
influence by independents or nonpartisans. On the downside, partisanship may
(1) promote divisiveness especially if its advocacies are met with great
opposition by the non-cohorts and (2) there will be bias especially if
arguments are thrown against them which leads to the scrutiny of the opposing
views at a greater degree just to refute the said argument.</span>
