Answer:
The relationship between the US and the USSR changed during the Cold War because the two countries transformed from being allies to being fierce rivals.
Explanation:
During World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union fought together as allies against the Axis powers. However, the relationship between the two nations was a tense one. Americans had long been wary of Soviet communism and concerned about Russian leader Joseph Stalin’s tyrannical rule of his own country. For their part, the Soviets resented the Americans’ decades-long refusal to treat the USSR as a legitimate part of the international community as well as their delayed entry into World War II, which resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of Russians. After the war ended, these grievances ripened into an overwhelming sense of mutual distrust and enmity.
Postwar Soviet expansionism in Eastern Europe fueled many Americans’ fears of a Russian plan to control the world. Meanwhile, the USSR came to resent what they perceived as American officials’ bellicose rhetoric, arms buildup and interventionist approach to international relations. In such a hostile atmosphere, no single party was entirely to blame for the Cold War; in fact, some historians believe it was inevitable.
Plato contends we are all made of the same three parts yet not all have the parts aligned in a healthy balance. The result is that greed, ambition, and foolishness rule in these unbalanced people. Plato lived through the democratic period in Athens' government and through the oligarchy period when the conquering Spartans installed the wealthy oligarchists as rulers of Athens, a move that unleashed a fierce retribution of bloodshed upon the unseated democratic rulers.
Plato rejected the rule of the mistake prone and seemingly unreasoning democratic faction and equally rejected the oligarchic rule of the retaliatory wealthy elite. After a period of seclusion, Plato wrote the Republic. In it he describes human nature and uses human nature (as he described it) as a metaphor and template for a reasonable government.
He assigns ruling authority to those who have a functioning alignment and balance between their three constituent parts and a dominant dedication to the highest: (1: lowest) love of money (laboring and merchants classes), (2: middle-most class) love of honor (military), and (3: highest) love of wisdom ("scientists, scholars, high-level experts, and similar sophisticates" [Jorn K. Bramann]).
His idea is that the two models he has seen don't work, so a third is needed. That third model is to make a government out of those who have the best minds by virtue of being best trained, best informed and best balanced (in the quote below, take note of and understand the "or"):
Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy, ... cities will never have rest from their evils. (Republic)
The right answer for the question that is being asked and shown above is that: "TRUE." William II asked Bismarck to resign because William II wanted a stronger military leader. This statement about William II is true as far as resigning is concerned.
7/12 of this region is shaded.
Socialists were in many ways looking for a radical change in the way society was structured. Their main goal was to re-build economic, political, philosophical and religious systems from scratch, neglecting everything related to the capitalist society they wanted to overcome. Because of this idea of re-installation, of decosntruction of all known models, socialists were utopian in their way of thinking and developing.
Social reformers on the other hand, understood the principles of socialist and communist societies but also the fact that their idea of democracy required winning state power. By slowly adapting the established system to their social reforms they could remain in power for long periods of time that could then be used to further transform and fix the issues presented by capitalism like lack of education, low wages and inequity.
