The equality and individualism underlying the emergence of capitalism and republican government in the eighteenth century naturally led people to begin to question the rights of women and slaves, especially African-American slaves in the United States. It is no coincidence that feminism and abolitionism arose from the ferment of the Industrial Revolution, the American Revolution and the French Revolution
.
Just as a better understanding of natural rights developed during the American struggle against the specific injustices suffered by the colonies, the feminist and abolitionist Angelina Grimké pointed out in an 1837 letter to Catherine E. Beecher, "I have found that the The cause against slavery is the great school of morality in our land-that in which human rights are fully investigated, and better understood and taught, than in any other. "
Answer:
Both were defenders of women's rights.
Answer:
The city-states changed in 2000 BCE as they became weak and easy to conquer by outsiders.
Explanation:
A city-state controlled its towns and villages, but city-states fought with one another over resources and territory.
Around 2000 BCE, the region became weak due to conflict, which made it easy to conquer by others. The change implemented regarding the economy and government after the capture. People were allowed to work, trade and do businesses along with paying taxes. The rulers of the city-states became more powerful, began to exercise their authority over others, and established dynasties.
Answer:
It was important to write it down in order to have an official agreement they could preserve. They also needed to make a statement towards the British about the separation of the colonies from the British Empire. It was a formal declaration towards the King and that they weren't willing to back down.
Explanation:
Answer:As “Democracy in America” revealed, Tocqueville believed that equality was the great political and social idea of his era, and he thought that the United States offered the most advanced example of equality in action. He admired American individualism but warned that a society of individuals can easily become atomized and paradoxically uniform when “every citizen, being assimilated to all the rest, is lost in the crowd.” He felt that a society of individuals lacked the intermediate social structures—such as those provided by traditional hierarchies—to mediate relations with the state. The result could be a democratic “tyranny of the majority” in which individual rights were compromised.
Explanation:The greatest danger Tocqueville saw was that public opinion would become an all-powerful force, and that the majority could tyrannize unpopular minorities and marginal individuals. In Volume 1, Part 2, Chapter 7, “Of the Omnipotence of the Majority in the United States and Its Effects,” he lays out his argument with a variety of well-chosen constitutional, historical, and sociological examples.