1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
9966 [12]
3 years ago
9

How did the Peace of Augsburg change Germany?

Social Studies
2 answers:
Flura [38]3 years ago
7 0
I think it is D
Hope this help you
Sati [7]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

The Peace of Augsburg ended early conflict between German Lutherans and Catholics and established a principle in which princes were guaranteed the right to select either Lutheranism or Catholicism within the domains they controlled.

Explanation:

I would say A

You might be interested in
The italian neorealist filmmakers often used non-actors in central roles, in the manner of
Sedbober [7]
The italian neorealist filmmakers often used non-actors in central roles, in the manner of Soviet Montages
7 0
3 years ago
Formal workgroups are not the same as teams because often they are comprised of individuals who sporadically interact but who ha
wlad13 [49]

Answer: Formal workgroups are not the same as teams because often they are comprised of individuals who sporadically interact but who have no <u>collective commitment</u> that requires joint efforts.

Explanation: Formal workgroups are not the same as teams because often they are comprised of individuals who sporadically interact but who have no collective commitment that requires joint efforts.

3 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is NOT within the judicial powers of the federal courts? Multiple Choice A controversy among states. Ques
Sladkaya [172]

Answer:

The correct answer is "A probate court case on a will of a deceased person"

Explanation:

The Constitution of the United States of America has put forward the judicial powers of the federal courts under Article 3. These powers are conferred upon the Supreme Court and other courts who's status is lower than that of the Supreme Court and were created by the Congress.

Section 2 of this article details a broad scope of the powers these courts posses. It maintains that the power extends to all cases in which the US is a party, cases that cover ambassadors and public officials, cases that involve two states, cases that involve citizens of different states. and cases between states and foreign states or entities.

In light of the above mentioned powers, all of the options in the question except the one concerning the probate court case fall under the ambit of federal courts. Federal courts do no have the power to probate wills. These cases are left to the state courts

8 0
3 years ago
Did the populists succeed? Why or why not?
Morgarella [4.7K]

They did not succeed, because most of the people did not like their methods.

Populism was a type of political situation experienced in Latin America between the 1930s and 1960s, which had a major propelling context for the 1929 crisis. At that time, several of the Latin nations - seen as having a peripheral economy - lived through a period economic development followed by the growth of urban centers and the re-articulation of social and political forces. It was in the midst of these diverse transformations that populist practice gained ground.

Populist politics is marked by the rise of charismatic leaders who seek to sustain their activities within the state through the broad support of majorities. Often, he abandons the use of ideological or partisan intermediaries to seek in the “defense of national interests” an alternative to the political tendencies of his time, be they traditionalist, oligarchic, liberal or socialist. In different ways, it propagates the belief in a leader above any other ideal.

In the field of its practical actions, the populist tendency prioritizes meeting the demands of the less favored classes, placing this option as an urgent need in the face of the “enemies of the nation”. In fact, populism has allowed for the political participation of social groups that historically have been completely marginalized from Latin American political arenas. However, this type of action by the popular strata with the State cannot be confused with the exercise of full democracy.

One of the most striking contradictions of populism is to preach the approach to the people, but, at the same time, to establish a control mechanism that does not allow the appearance of political tendencies contrary to the current power. In such a way, populist governments are also marked by the dismantling of political oppositions and the exchange of “favors for the people” for unconditional support for the great leader responsible for leading the country.

In addition to authoritarianism and assistentialism, populist governments are also very concerned with the use of the media as an instrument to publicize government actions. Through the installation or control of these media, populism uses a massive official advertisement that seeks to spread itself among the most different social groups through the unrestricted use of radio, newspapers, magazines and television stations.

The rise of populist regimes has always been viewed with some suspicion by certain domestic or foreign political groups. The capacity to mobilize the masses established by such governments, the appeal to national interests and the lack of a clear political perspective could jeopardize the interests defended by the elites who controlled the ownership of the land or the productive forces of the industrial sector.

In this way, we can understand that populism went into crisis when it was no longer able to negotiate the interests - often antagonistic - of the economic elites and the working classes. When political and social tensions reached this point, we can see that conservative national groups sought international political support, mainly from the United States, to sweep away populism through the installation of dictatorships that emerged between the 1950s and 1970s.

6 0
3 years ago
When Congress required the Southern states to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, all of them refused. all of them ratified it. Geo
Ratling [72]

Answer:  The amendment had been rejected by most Southern states but was ratified by the required three-fourths of the states. Known as the "Reconstruction Amendment," it forbids any state to deny any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Explanation:

3 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • How many counties are there in the United States?
    6·2 answers
  • The term hassles refers to
    12·1 answer
  • Country A has a mixed economy with free-market leanings. Country B has an absolute command economy. Both want to increase corn p
    15·1 answer
  • Although East Africa is rich in resources, they are not used to full advantage. What is one reason for this?
    5·2 answers
  • Jill always attends class and spends at least 6 hours each day studying. Before a test she feels very confident in her ability t
    11·1 answer
  • What is the difference between direct and representative democracy.
    9·1 answer
  • How would you make your friends accept her as your special someone
    12·2 answers
  • When __________, the speed shall be decreased as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyanc
    8·1 answer
  • How does the "human" part of human resources influence how companies need to treat these resources?​
    8·1 answer
  • What world city is attempting to transform itself from a garden city to a city in a garden?
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!