Klemens Metternich can be considered a conservative statesman because He believed that strong monarchies would lead to social and political stability. This is further explained below.
<h3>What is
a statesman?</h3>
Generally, one who knows the ins and outs of government a person who takes part in running the government or influencing its policies
In conclusion, As someone who thought that powerful monarchs would bring about social and political stability, Klemens Metternich is an example of a conservative statesman.
Read more about statesman
brainly.com/question/10308489
#SPJ1
It is claimed that she fought a dirty battle which was more based on insults than on presenting your own plan and program. She had the incumbency advantage and instead of focusing on that, she defamed her opponents which even led to her being called to court in a defamation lawsuit.
Contents. The Book of Acts clearly focuses on the beginnings of the church, and two people… The apostle Peter, and the one who actually possessed the courage to go to the farthest parts of the known world with the gospel of Jesus Christ, his name was Paul the Apostle. The Gospel spread from Israel, northward to Antioch, and then westward to Asia Minor, Greece, and finally Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.
The first 12 chapters of the book of Acts deal with Peter, and the remainder of the book, the last 16 chapters is devoted to the apostle Paul.
The major areas of history with which the author has dealt are :
1) The establishment and progress of the church at Jerusalem until the dispersion which arose at the time of Stephen's death (Acts 1-7);
2) The preaching of the gospel to the surrounding area, including its introduction to the Gentiles (Acts 8-12) ;
3) The preaching tours of Paul and the struggle to define the church's position with regard to the law of Moses (Acts 13:1-21:16); and
4) Paul's imprisonment, which began in Jerusalem and was concluded in Rome (Acts 21:17-28 :30).
Answer: Representative democracy is a form of democracy in which people vote for representatives who then vote on policy initiatives; as opposed to direct democracy, a form of democracy in which people vote on policy initiatives directly.
Explanation:
