The republicans had changed from a party of moral reform to a party of material interest
The New Deal, implemented by Franklin D. Roosevelt, was a way to help the American economy recover during the Great Depression. When it comes to the Southern US, FDR made programs that were aimed at providing relief for this part of the country. One of the most famous ones was the Agricultural Adjustment Act.
This act paid farmers to not make crops. The reason why the government did not want farmers producing more crops is because their was a surplus of several goods in the economy. When there is a surplus, the cost of these goods decreases, meaning farmers make less money of their products. By creating the Agricultural Adjustment Act, FDR helped to increase the price of foods made by farmers, allowing them to generate a greater profit.
<span>In my point of view if a group of people pillaged a town,they took valuable items from the town.Because if they are good minded people they will ask help from other villagers there is no need to pillage the town.If they are evil minded and more dangerous they decided to settle in the town.</span>
It was one of the first democratic governments in recorded history. Letting people vote on leaders was revolutionary at the time and did lead to things like the roman republic, the american revolution, and the french revolution. It lead to a lot of time being spent on the tragedy of being human or self aware. Which of course lead to things like maybe i deserve to have a say in the government.
Later when the Romans took over they looked at all the Greeks stuff and thought huh? maybe this is a good idea. And the rest of course is history.
Hope this helps
Answer: A) Hobbes thought people were innately violent.
<u>Further explanation</u>:
Both English philosophers 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 <em>Leviathan </em> 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 violent 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 <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government </em>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 the difference between Hobbes and Locke, I've often put it 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. :-)
