Roman Republic became dictatorship in the event of abolishment of monarchy back in 501 BC
Explanation:
The Roman empire was under monarchy ever since ages, which later to be divided by the power of King into two praetors. This division was done annually, which later to turn as a threat in order to re-establish monarchy.
This posed the necessity to develop a dictatorship as proposed and intel by the Senate. Praetor maximus or the dictator was hence made the superior position and Titus Lartius in 501 BC is known to be the first to acquire the position, leaving Roman Republic to dictatorship.
Answer: From the passage, Fred Hampton is saying what may cost him his life, he is probably saying what would expose the decay in the system, and when he does so, more people are enlightened and would want to join him, so they are planning to get rid of him(which could have various terms but might not be a pleasant experience?
Explanation:
Fred Hampton was an activist. Activist play one role in the society and that's speaking out the wrongs in government. In doing such, they might be attacked by the ruling government or those benefitting from the government. In most cases, they might be set up for death and people may not really know but would just hear that an activist was killed
From the passage, Fred Hampton is saying what may cost him his life, he is probably saying what would expose the decay in the system, and when he does so, more people are enlightened and would want to join him, so they are planning to get rid of him(which could have various terms but might not be a pleasant experience
D is the correct answer
Interestingly enough, the world did not see an increase in the number of hijackings after 9/11, which possibly could be credited to increased security measures.
After Mexico's defeat on the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo came into action. The U.S. was recquired to pay 15 million dollars as compensation for damages, while taking ownership of the territories of California, half of New Mexico, most of Arizona, Nevada, Utah and parts of Wyoming and Colorado.
Mexicans that were settled in these territories, had the choice to relocate within the new limits of their country, or stay and receive American citizenship with full civil rights. This had quite big implications in U.S. culture as it became more racially diverse. In the following censuses between 1850 and 1920 most annexed mexicans were counted as "white", but in reality, segregation only grew with time and continues to do so until this day, with mexican-native americans being considered foreigners almost universally. At the same time, mexican migration to these areas also continued to rise over the years, making the contrast bigger.
Politically, we can say Mexico wasn't in a bad position in terms of their negotiation power. The U.S. had shown itself hesitant to annex Mexico's territories and having deep domestic divisions in regards to the aims and justification for the expansion. However, the military power of the U.S. overshadowed all of that and their victory was definite. The treaty established a pattern of political inequality between the two countries, and this lopsided relationship has stalked Mexican-U.S. relations ever since.
Hope this helps!
Answer:
It changed the old social order, overthrew the monarchy completely, and the church did not have a lot control since it was under the states control. Nationalism also spread and revolutionaries set up state schools to replace religious ones. They also organized systems to help the poor, old soldiers, and war widows.
Explanation:
