Ferdinand. Marcos. became president of the Philippines in 1965 but his second term saw growing violence and unrest in the country, due to increasingly poor economic conditions. The attempted assassination of the country’s defense minister in 1972 led Marcos to declare martial law. Marcos abolished congress and began to rule by decree, he clamped down on individual freedoms and freedom of the press, rewrote the constitution to allow himself additional terms and more power, and began to arrest his opponents.
The Dawes act was the government attempt in having natives assimilate into American society. They were stripped from their culture and beliefs. The land that once belonged to them was sold off to white settlers and they were given the option to become citizens only if they settled for the land that was offered to them. In a way yes it was successful because Indians were forced to assimilate.
I don't really understand the difference between these two, politically, culturally, and economically. All I know between the two is that the Roman Republic are for the citizens of Rome. However, the Roman Empire is ruled by a Emperors. Now, the connotations of emperors are considered bad I think. But isn't Marcus Aurelius and Augustus very good leaders. Does anyone have some insight on how Roman R and Roman E differ from each other.
Answer:
The ideology of rigidly patriarchal family life was so omnipotent that even radically minded women could not resist it. They had to fight (not always successfully) and seek a compromise between patriarchal family life and their rights. For most feminists of the first wave, who lived in the 19th century, the solution was the concept of identity, or parity of differences, recognizing the equality of women and men due to the fact that they have different and complementary qualities.
Since the mid-19th century, the women's movement is gaining strength, the demands of feminists in different countries began to take the form of public campaigns and political actions. It should be noted that the right to vote was not initially the basic requirement of feminists, and only at the end of the 19th century, when other fundamental rights were considered to be obtained (the right to education, property, earnings, guardianship, protection from physical violence by the husband), the organized women's movement passes from a moderate to a more radical stage, putting forward as the main point of its program the requirement of granting voting rights to women. Suffrage itself - - thanks to the English feminists who used this concept in relation to primarily women's suffrage - went down in history as a definition of the political direction in feminism. Women were increasingly convinced that suffrage was paramount and was the key to further progress. The suffragists believed that with the legal opportunity to vote in elections, women would soon be freed from all other forms of discrimination.
Explanation: