Here we go..
These questions deal with opinion and perspective supplied by facts, so if this is purely academic there is no perfect answer. In my opinion, yes imperial rule has always been bad. There are positive things about empires, that is what makes them interesting. There are pros and cons, but often that not (speaking in both modern and recent times) the pros are supposed to blot out the cons. The Roman Empire is an ancient example, so yeah those pros weren't mean to blot out the cons. Never forget this, most pros of the imperial government are to make 'managing' easier. If the people dont want to be ruled by a foreign power, then youll get what you always have. Riots and whatnot. Ha, flip open any area of a text book and youll find the answer to "What is a lot or half the people dont want the imperialism?" Listen, there is no such thing as a completely good anything. But also, never let that be an excuse for injustice. Whether or not you judge yours or someone elses empire as good depends on you really, how you feel what you want, your morals. And if you want specific examples - I have plenty. But I am tired of typing now so if you want examples just msg me. Hope I helped
Answer:
The history of socialism has its origins in the 1789 French Revolution and the changes which it brought, although it has precedents in earlier movements and ideas. The Communist Manifesto was written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848 just before the Revolutions of 1848 swept Europe, expressing what they termed scientific socialism. In the last third of the 19th century, social democratic parties arose in Europe, drawing mainly from Marxism. The Australian Labor Party was the world's first elected socialist party when it formed government in the Colony of Queensland for a week in 1899.[1]
In the first half of the 20th century, the Soviet Union and the communist parties of the Third International around the world mainly came to represent socialism in terms of the Soviet model of economic development and the creation of centrally planned economies directed by a state that owns all the means of production, although other trends condemned what they saw as the lack of democracy. In the United Kingdom, Herbert Morrison said that "socialism is what the Labour government does" whereas Aneurin Bevan argued that socialism requires that the "main streams of economic activity are brought under public direction", with an economic plan and workers' democracy.[2] Some argued that capitalism had been abolished.[3] Socialist governments established the mixed economy with partial nationalisations and social welfare.
By 1968, the prolonged Vietnam War (1959–1975) gave rise to the New Left, socialists who tended to be critical of the Soviet Union and social democracy. Anarcho-syndicalists and some elements of the New Left and others favoured decentralised collective ownership in the form of cooperatives or workers' councils. Socialists have also adopted the causes of other social movements such as environmentalism, feminism and progressivism.[4] At the turn of the 21st century in Latin America, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez championed what he termed socialism of the 21st century, which included a policy of nationalisation of national assets such as oil, anti-imperialism and termed himself a Trotskyist supporting permanent revolution.[5]
The Revolution also unleashed powerful political, social, and economic forces that would transform the post-Revolution politics and society, including increased participation in politics and governance, the legal institutionalization of religious toleration, and the growth and diffusion of the population
They often aligned themselves with other developing nations to create a bloc. They have the power of one super power nation, but they are still able to speak their countries opinions. Either wise, they would be completed over powered.
Modern day government across most patts of the world, elected representatives are delegates chosen by the people.
