Out of the three movements, the independence of India was the one that required the least amount of fighting. India achieved its independence in a peaceful manner through the adoption of the ideas of civil disobedience. However, although the process of independence was initially peaceful and led to a straight-forward retreat of the British, its aftermath was more complicated. In the aftermath of independence, India was fragmented into India and Pakistan, with Bangladesh separating from Pakistan later on.
In the case of Latin America, there were several movements that took place at different times. However, several of this were unified thanks to the figure of Simon Bolivar. The conflicts that took place were a lot more violent than those of India. Moreover, fragmentation was also more significant, as these resulted in the creation of several new countries.
Finally, the independence of the United States took place much earlier than these other independence movements. The independence of the Thirteen Colonies was one of the earliest movements for independence to take place. However, it did not lead to the creation of a country. Instead, it led to the creation of a union or a confederacy of several separate colonies, united through some common ties and documents, such as the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation.
Answer:big populated cities, or places the have war with
Explanation:
Answer:
did it on edge guy above me is right
Explanation:
If the US prioritized the profession of loyalty to the current government more highly than it prizes First Amendment rights of free speech, something like the Sedition Act might be presented to the American people as an act of patriotism.
The Sedition Act of 1918 was passed to squelch voices in the US that was perceived as interfering in any way with the nation's war effort as a participant in World War I. Legal scholars now see that act as contradicting the First Amendment. Indeed, the Sedition Act was repealed in 1921, only a few years after its passage.
But there have been hints in recent years, in regard to what is called "the war on terror," that Americans will tolerate restriction of some civil liberties if they think their security is at stake. The USA PATRIOT Act, passed in 2001 (after the 9-11 attacks), included measures that allowed the government much leeway in regard to surveillance of electronic communications. The American Civil Liberties Union continues to challenge these sorts of aspects of the PATRIOT Act.
