Answer:
"John (“Jack”) Reed wasn’t looking backward to the French Revolution or even the Paris Commune when he chronicled the seizure of power of the Russian Revolution of 1917. As a 30-year-old independent radical journalist, he was looking at it with fresh eyes. What he saw was not just the overthrow of a repressive monarchist oligarchy and its attendant bourgeois class, but a vast democratic, majoritarian movement based on “soviets,” or councils, made up of workers, soldiers, and peasants. Although he had been embedded in Pancho Villa’s rebel army in Mexico and covered Industrial Workers of the World strikes in New Jersey and miners’ struggles in Colorado, it was witnessing the cataclysmic events in Russia that confirmed him as a revolutionary."-Ten Days That Shook the World by John Reed
Answer:
It's possible but extremely unlikely to Revive an extinct animal but It is possible to create an organism similar to whatever extinct animal that is in question using its dna or the dna of its relatives. If scientists did revive extinct populations it could have an extremely detrimental effect on humans and our environment.
Answer:
The Massachusetts Bay Colony government was able to be, at least partially, simultaneously theocratic, democratic, oligarchic, and authoritarian. It was able to be partly theocratic because of the doctrine of the covenant, which stated that the whole purpose of government was to enforce God’s laws. God’s laws applied to everyone, even nonbelievers. Everyone also had to pay taxes for the government-supported church. This meant that religious leaders held enormous power in the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
They were able to effectively control who was admitted to the church by conducting public interrogations of people who claimed to have experienced conversion. The last reason it was partially theocratic was one of the main governors, John Winthrop, believed he had a “calling” from God to lead the Massachusetts colony. The Massachusetts Bay Colony was partially democratic for a couple of reasons. First, the freemen elected the governor and his associates each year. The freemen also voted for a representative assembly called the General Court. The Colony was also partly an oligarchy.
It was an oligarchy because only Puritans could be freemen and were eligible to vote. Puritans were even more limited because religious leaders could control who was admitted into the church. Finally, the Massachusetts Bay Colony was partially authoritarian. This was partially because many of the residents were Puritans. Puritans shared in the “Protestant Ethic”, which involved serious commitment to work and to engagement in worldly pursuits. Everyone was held to these standards because of this. Everyone was expected to do this, even if they weren’t Puritan.
Explanation:
Answer:
Boycotts
Explanation:
I am not completely sure but here is my reasoning. Boycotts had more of an impact because they caused companies and businesses to lose customers. Thus, causing them to have less money to sustain their business. For example, the Montgomery bus boycotts. People of color and allies quit funding businesses because of segregation laws.
