Want this question answered?
The Bill of Rights, also known as the first ten amendments, states as clearly as possible what the government is not allowed to do to the individuals of its nation. The rights mentioned are mostly based on people being treated fairly if they were to be arrested.
The role of the government is very limited. The literal translation from French is "let be". The government in this system strictly provides a legal system where property rights and contracts can be enforced. Past that, the government is not involved in economic activity. Transactions are free from taxes, tariffs, regulations, etc. This system has never truly existed anywhere because, obvioiusly, the existence of government to provide a legal system requires taxes of some sort to be collected. So, in practical terms, it refers to a system where the government interferes with commerce as little as possible.
You need to specify which government you are referring to if you want to make it possible to answer your question.
The question of whether guild members could hold public office was very largely dependent on the place where the person lived. There was not much uniformity of laws in the Middle Ages, and where one city might be ruled by nobility, there were others that were governed by people of the middle class, and there were a few that were governed by clergy. In the medieval communes and certain other cities, it was possible that a guild or group of guilds actually controlled the government, and that guild membership was required to be able to participate in the town or city legislature.
1. I am not sure if this is correct, but this is what I found through my own search. A few problems with the kind of government set up by the Articles of Confederation included the following. Firstly, the larger states had more power in congress than the smaller states, which led to manipulation because the larger states could use their authority to make other states help pay of that one state's debt. This was possible because they could vote it so since they represented the majority of the population. Also, each state had a different currency which made trade almost impossible. Another point is that since the states were governed all relied on one another to be a successful nation, to produce, sell, and afford necessities to thrive on, they were not independent making them each vulnerable and therefore creating a generally weak government.
Technically, Belgium currently does not have a government because the possible governing parties, as selected by the executive, have failed to form viable coalitions in parliament, so they did not end up making a government. However, it is not true that Belgium is not being governed, since a care-taker government holds the reins of power until such time as a viable majority can control parliament.
A representative form of government derives its mandate to govern from the consent of the people to be governed. The governed peopel can withdraw, recall, or change their mandate by means of regularly scheduled elections but if/when the government refuses to obey the mandate of the elctorate it is possible that revolution or civil war could occur when the people attempt to remove the no-longer-legitimate government by force.
African Americans controlled a majority of the votes in the Mississippi state government.
There are elections roughly every four years if there is a majority government. If there is a minority government, it is possible to have elections just a few months apart, depending on the circumstances.
African Americans controlled a majority of the votes in the Mississippi state government.
Afican Americans controlled a majority of the votes in the Mississippi state government
That might depend on the specific country in which you live, but in general, I don't see why not. In general, an individual can sue another individual, or an organization. In some countries it is even possible for an individual to sue the government.
The Bill of Rights, also known as the first ten amendments, states as clearly as possible what the government is not allowed to do to the individuals of its nation. The rights mentioned are mostly based on people being treated fairly if they were to be arrested.
It is possible ,but the majority is from cracked repo sources.
America was founded with the goal of freedom from too much government interference in the lives of citizens. Capitalism is a continuation of that goal, in that capitalism acknowledges the right of individuals when it comes to business and earning money with as little government interference as possible.
population
it is possible beccause you dont always need both