<span>Competition between Britain and other European powers led to wars
as they scrambled for territory. This include the Napoleonic Wars and the Seven
Years War. However, the British Empire also opened up the world for trade and
also granted its colonies independence.</span>
I believe the answer is d.
Answer:
The answer is detailed in the explanation;
Explanation:
<u><em>
Dear Sir, Jhon Locke;
</em></u>
With my sincere words I do not intend to change his ideals of reform but I do intend to be heard on the basis of the experience of the human being and what characterizes him, it is well known that the man without law is an irrational being incapable of restraining his impulses and actions Likewise, ambition, greed for power causes divisions and doubts to be sown and the fracture of power occurs, that is why an absolute monarchy where absolute power and responsibility falls on only that supreme being already chosen of impartial way to impartially govern all kinds of people without any preference to either side, for me it is and surely being the ideal form of government.
<em><u>Respected Sir; Thomas hobbe
:</u></em>
Considering his arguments, I find a heartfelt contradiction; if the power corrupts the human being who by natural tendency is given to ambition and greed; How can absolute power and responsibility be left to govern and educate an entire people in the hands of one man?
Really, in an absolute monarchy there is no freedom, there is no democracy, we need to work as a team to help each other to balance power, although it is true that two heads think more than one, being in a position of responsibility and knowing that we have that answering for our acts before the laws or branches of power causes us to be more cautious when making decisions that could affect our nation, our actions have consequences and a bad control of absolute power undoubtedly brings total chaos.
A misunderstanding led to conflict with the American Indians. The American Indians signed a treaty that led to lasting peace. A peace treaty was signed, but the colonists did not follow it.
I think that Adam Smith would be more supportive of globalization of multinational corporations since his major work, the Wealth of Nations dealt with the workings of the capitalist system and supported it. I think that Karl Marx would be strongly opposed to the control that the multi-nationals have over their neo-colonies but at the same time would applaud the way that globalization has developed solidarity between the working class of the different countries such as between the major capitalist countries and the so-called Third World countries.
