Answer:
Olympe de Gouges: in the French Revolution. Declared that women were equal to men
Explanation:
De Gouges was in favor of the revolution on the grounds that all people were created equal, regardless of race or gender.
However, she became disenchanted with the revolution when she realized that there was no intention of giving women equal rights as men
French social reformer and writer who challenged conventional views on a number of matters, especially the role of women as citizens.
She wrote the "Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen"
Born: May 07, 1748
Died: Nov 03, 1793
Gouges is someone I recently learned about. She mostly fought for woman's, and other races rights, so yeah this is what I have. Hoped this helped :)
The U.S. women’s rights movement first emerged in the 1830s, when the ideological impact of the Revolution and the Second Great Awakening combined with a rising middle class and increasing education to enable small numbers of women, encouraged by a few sympathetic men, to formulate a critique of women’s oppression in early 19th-century America.
The best option regarding events in the Soviet Union in World War II would be that "C.<span> The Soviet Union became an ally of the United States and Great Britain during World War II," since they all shared a "common enemy" in Nazi Germany. </span>
Answer:
I don't know...call me crazy, but I don't think this would be such a bad idea (at least sometime in the future.) With the advent of the internet, there really is no reason why people can't have more input on legislation. Remember, congressmen act as representatives of the people for logistical reasons. Were voting allowed via internet, mail, or permanent polling places, the logistical roadblocks are reduced.
This country has an annoying quality where senators and representatives are elected and then inject their own personality into their voting. They are supposed to represent the people of their district. If 60% of the people in their district feel a certain way about an issue, why is the congressman/woman allowed to vote a different way? Why do their personal beliefs really matter at all? They are supposed to be voting the way their district wants regardless of what they personally believe.
I know, I know, things can be horribly complicated and the average person can't possibly understand all the issues they are voting on, but last I checked their is no intelligence requirement to be in the government...many people in governement now are dumb as a box of rocks. They don't have to be smart to be elected, they have to be personable and have good advisors working in the background.
Imagine being able to directly vote on education issues, warfare issues, and being able to prioritize budget items. Instead of blaming the morons in congress we would only be able to blame ourselves when things went horribly wrong. Of course, some form of standing governement would still be needed for a lot of reasons.
Again, I know the technology is not hot enough right now to provide the secruity that would be needed, etc, but it won't be long...
Answer:
B. There were positive effects as well as negative effects.
Explanation:
