In a democracy people have the right to choose whether or not to own. In communism, no-one has the right to own as ownership of everything is collective.
no
Republics are normally democratic.
KARL MARX had the view that history was inexorably trending to communism and that capitalism would improve to socialism and socialism would improve to communism.
Every US President has opposed direct democracy because it would allow the unwashed masses to directly control policy as opposed to restricting policy votes and decisions to those people educated enough to make them. Additionally, in a direct democracy, it is likely the President would be out of a job.As it currently stands, the US government is an indirect democracy, where citizens vote for politicians who will themselves vote on policy. A direct democracy circumvents the politicians' vote.
The Truman Doctrine was based on the U.S.A's fear of communism taking over the world. The main goal of the Truman Doctrine was to stop communism from spreading further ( containment of communism) this was to be achieved by promoting ( more like fighting for) democracy in countries that were falling to communism. Truman believed his goal would have been accomplished when the whole world was rid of communism and became a democracy instead.
The answer is Karl Marx.
Menzies feared communism because it would take away the freedom of many citizens. He also believed in the containment of democracy and capitalism and wanted things to stay that way. Menzies feared communism because it would take away the freedom of many citizens. He also believed in the containment of democracy and capitalism and wanted things to stay that way. Menzies feared communism because it would take away the freedom of many citizens. He also believed in the containment of democracy and capitalism and wanted things to stay that way.
i would like to know the answer
True.
"Communism" itself is not a political structure. It is an economic one just like socialism and capitalism. A dictatorship would have a dictator, a monarchy would have a king or queen. A beaurocracy would have a speaker. A democracy would have a President or prime minister.
Communism often, as it is completely different from capitalist ideology. In Communism everybody has a fair share, whilst in capitalist society most of the wealth goes to a minority.
I think that by definition the king did not have supporters in the same way one would characterizes supporters in a "for the people by the people" state. I suggest that a king's "supporters" are subjects because a king would typically inherit the title as opposed to being elected.