The best agreement to the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau is that In order for a government’s laws to be valid, citizens have to agree with those laws.
<h3>Who was Jean-Jacques Rousseau?</h3>
This man was a philosopher and one of the persons that have helped to shape governments all over the world.
He was one of those that agreed that the citizens of a place needed to have their rights and not be alienated by governments.
Read more on Jean-Jacques Rousseau here: brainly.com/question/14246866
#SPJ1
Answer:
The US were against the government of Salvador Allende in Chile because he was a Marxist and they feared this would increase the influence of communism in the Western hemisphere.
Explanation:
The United States intervened in the presidency of Salvador Allende and supported a military coup by Augusto Pinochet, that would lead to the death of Salvador Allende and the instillation of a military dictatorship in Chile that lasted from 1974-1990. The actions that would actively undermine the Allende government were supported by the US government and the CIA because Allende had Marxist views that when against the liberal democracy ideals of the United States government. Intervention helped assure that there would not be a further spread of communism in Latin America that could threaten the sphere of influence of the United States. I think that the United States shouldn't intervene in the sovereign systems of other countries and that the US should have faced charges of human rights violations for the death of General René Schneider who the CIA paid $50,000 to have kidnapped and delivered weapons to the pro-coup factions who were after Schneider.
Answer:
That the photo was taken a long time ago and maybe they are trying to sell something or they are going somewhere. Hope this helps :D
Explanation:
Yes I think that each side has good things to say about the other side. This is because I think that many people's political viewpoints don't always perfectly align to one party or the other. In reality, life is much more complicated than picking one side. Sure some people might agree with policies from the Democrat's side, but they might see other Republican views to be valid as well. I like to think of it as a buffet of ideas, where people tend to pick and choose which talking points they magnetically snap to. We could have for example a socially liberal person but who supports conservative financial measures; or we could have someone who has very religious conservative morals, but supports liberal monetary policies.
In other words, it's unrealistic to assume people will be purely one party. Those who seem that way tend to be stuck in a bubble where it's like a feedback loop of talking points fed to them. Fox News is one example of this on the conservative side, while MSNBC is an example of this on the liberal side. Those stuck in this bubble would likely not have much nice things to say about the other side, if they have anything nice to say at all. However, I think to some (if not many) people, politics has become very toxic that they simply turn the tv off entirely. By "turn off", I mean literally turn it off or change the channel to something else. These people I'd consider somewhere in the middle in a moderate range. Furthermore, these moderates are likely to have some nice things to say about both sides, but they might have their complaints about both sides as well.
In short, if you pick someone from either extreme, then it's likely they'll have nothing nice to say about the other side. If you pick someone from the middle, then they might have nice things to say about both sides. It all depends who you ask. Also, it depends on how politically active they are.
Two reasons created a negative image of the Avignon papacy are:
1. Inspite of 72 years of dictatorship unable to reform itself. 2. Even was unable to finish the draw line of 100 years long war.
Explanation:
From 1305 to 1377 these long 72 years of of Roman churches the Avignon papacy was not able to reform itself means the its appearance and work layout was same as like earlier days which not expected as with time it should gradually change its form.
Even of this lonf tenure Avignon papacy was unable to draw the finish lone of long 100 years war. It was one of the drawback and negative side of avignon papacy. George XI witnessed the ruins of the city who was the last bishop of Roman church.
