A is most likely right because a lot modern European countries get their borders from cultural and linguistic boundaries after old empires like Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Germany split up. Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Slovenia, just to name a few, were ethnic groups without countries before WW1.
B: isn't true, just look at eastern Europe in the 17th century, tons of ethnic groups living in one country. Even with more immigration to the Europe, most immigrants assimilate into European cultures.
C: Although geography can influence political borders to varying degrees, European nations don't strictly follow physical geographic features to my knowledge. There are a lot of borders based off of rivers you can see have stayed the same despite the rivers moving (Serbia and Croatia's border is a prime example)
D: I don't know what 'define' means in this context, but if it means religion and geography are the main reasons Europe get's their borders is just flat out wrong. We already talked about geography, but religion doesn't effect European borders since most European countries are christians and are secular. The only example I can think off the top of my head of religion affecting borders is in Ireland when they separated the protestant north from the rest of the island which was catholic.
Hope this helped you out :)
The conclusion of “Narrative Of The Life Of Frederick Douglass” focuses on the hardships of Douglass’ life as he enters adulthood, and his eventual escape from slavery as he heads north. The final two chapters and the appendix show a huge difference when compared to the first few chapters of the story. In Chapter X, we see Douglass go from a passive observer of violence to experiencing the violence first hand. Mr. Covey’s actions of whipping and kicking Douglass are one of the first in
This would have made the Congress as the ultimate power in the democratic system.
Explanation:
It is dangerous for the legislature or the executive to not have a system of c<u>hecks and balances which is maintained by the judiciary in the system of democracy.</u>
This would have been meaningless if the jury had no power to declare an act from the congress as unconstitutional. <u>As it has this power, the legislature can be kept in check against compromising the constitution a</u>nd getting away with it if it ever happens.
Answer: D. Romney won the most delegates in the race for 2012 nomination.
Explanation: Given the information in this graph, Romney has roughly 1500 delegates VS all the other candidates who don't even have 400 delegates. The graph does not give any information about caucuses or primaries, so A couldn't be the right answer. Paul, Gingrich, and Santorum combined is around 800, where Romney has 1500, therefore B is incorrect. And again with C, the graph does not provide any information about about primaries so therefore irrelevant, leaving D as the final answer.
<em />First of all, they can indeed protest. In the USA, we have the right to do so, and if enough people can protest, the government can notice and make decisions based on the opinion of the people. Secondly, back in history, people used civil disobedience, but if we're talking about the modern world this doesn't apply <em>that much.</em> We can also utilize the media. Millions use it, and a simple tweet or instagram post can spread the word to countless amounts of people, including the government. In fact, the government does actually use social media, giving citizens who want to speak out about their beliefs a better chance to do so. Hope this helps.
