<u><em>The correct answer is D. Coercive Acts </em></u>
<u><em>The Coercive Acts are a series of four acts organized an settled by the British </em></u>
<u><em>Government in order to bring back order in Massachusetts and penalize Bostonians for their Tea party
</em></u>
Answer:
The New Jersey Plan was the proposal for the structure of the US Federal Government. It was presented by William Paterson in 1787. It was presented to counter the Virginia Plan. His motive was to provide each state with one vote in the National legislature regardless of their size. Although the plan was rejected, it did impact the Great Compromise of 1787 which shaped the American Government in the way it exists today.
Answer:
The single word which best describes the Zaibatsus would be conglomerate. To be a bit more detailed, Zaibatsus (財閥, literally financial clique) is a Japanese term referring to industrial and financial business conglomerates in the Empire of Japan, whose influence and size allowed control over significant parts of the Japanese economy from the Meiji period until the end of World War II.
It was oppressive to citizens, exclusionary, controlled by the wealthy, and limited people's ability to earn a good wage.
Explanation:
My friend is Japanese so he helped me answer this question
Answer:
Answer Expert Verified
hello here your answer and please mark me as brainlest
Both English philosophers, Hobbes and Locke, believed there is a "social contract" -- that governments are formed by the will of the people. But their theories on why people want to live under governments were very different.
Thomas Hobbes published his political theory in Leviathan in 1651, following the chaos and destruction of the English Civil War. He saw human beings as naturally suspicious of one another, in competition with each other, and evil toward one another as a result. Forming a government meant giving up personal liberty, but gaining security against what would otherwise be a situation of every person at war with every other person.
John Locke published his Two Treatises on Civil Government in 1690, following the mostly peaceful transition of government power that was the Glorious Revolution in England. Locke believed people are born as blank slates--with no preexisting knowledge or moral leanings. Experience then guides them to the knowledge and the best form of life, and they choose to form governments to make life and society better.
In teaching about Hobbes and Locke, I've often described the difference between them in this way. If society were playground basketball, Hobbes believed you must have a referee who sets and enforces rules, or else the players will eventually get into heated arguments and bloody fights with one another, because people get nasty in competition that way. Locke believed you could have an enjoyable game of playground basketball without a referee, but a referee makes the game better because then any disputes that come up between players have a fair way of being resolved. Of course, Hobbes and Locke never actually wrote about basketball -- a game not invented until 1891 in America by James Naismith. But it's just an illustration I've used to try to show the difference of ideas between Hobbes and Locke. :-)
Explanation:
