If we were to be forced into a system such as a dictatorship, the people would have no say. With the current system of government, the people can elect representatives who decide for the people which is what we want, instead of a government who has complete control over everyone and everything.
Answer(s):
1st: <u>Clerics and Kings</u> on the top of the hierarchy, <u>Farmers and Warriors</u> beneath them, <u>Fishermen</u> on the third layer, <u>Weavers and Leatherworkers</u> on the fourth layer and <u>Smiths and Griots</u> at the bottom layer.
2nd: The political systems of African kingdoms <u>shared similarities with European kingdoms</u>. The king, such as <u>Mansa Musa</u> of <u>Mali</u> and <u>Sonni Ali</u> of Songhay, had near absolute power and there was no separation of power. The king and his councilors and advisors carried out <u>executive, legislative, and judicial functions.</u>
3rd: First, the early African kingdoms and empires r<u>elied heavily on trade with other people</u>. Besides the trade in <u>ivory, gold, and other commodities</u> identified earlier, produce from agriculture was also exchanged in the form of <u>cash crops</u>. These trade relations put them at the center of the economy of the east and west.
Hope this helped ;)
Answer: D going to the movies.
Explanation:
I think
<span>Remember, at the time, it was the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Empire (unlike any of the other major states in Europe) was a patchwork of over a dozen major ethnic groups. Nationalism tends to organize along ethnic boundaries (that is, nations tend to form around a large concentration of one ethnic group). Thus, with a very large number of different ethnic groups, the Empire had to worry about each group wanting to split from the Empire, and form its own nation. Indeed, after WW1, this is what happened to the Empire - it was split into about a 8 different countries (or, more accurately, portions of 8 countries included lands formerly part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire).</span>
