My life would be significantly impacted as civil liberties protect individuals from government overreach and secure basic rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly. Without these protections, my freedom to express myself, practice my beliefs, and peacefully assemble would be severely restricted, leading to a lack of autonomy and potential oppression.
Montesquieu's ideal form of government was a system of checks and balances where power is separated between different branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial). He believed this division would prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful and protect individual liberties.
The concept of freedom is subjective and can be measured in different ways. Various organizations produce indices that rank countries based on different aspects of freedom, such as political rights and civil liberties. Some countries often ranked high in terms of freedom include Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
Unionists believed in maintaining the unity of the United States and preserving the Union, while Confederates believed in states' rights and the right to secede from the Union. Unionists supported a strong central government, while Confederates favored a more decentralized government with power resting in the individual states. This fundamental difference in views ultimately led to the Civil War.
They believed that the government should spend money to help the economy.
Even more so in fact. The existence of a single political arm would allow for heavy misuse of the ability to appoint individuals to office. There would not be checks and balances that our government permits to prevent such abuses
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is probably the most well known, though some would argue that their fight for civil liberties actually impedes on others.
If by ruler you mean one person or a small group, then it would be called a "Dictatorship".
One example of abusing a person's civil liberties, or human rights, would be to use slander to ruin someone else's reputation. Others would be discriminating, profiling, and the taking away of ones life.
somthing will happen If there were no limits on civil liberties, people would have more freedom. People would still feel constrained from certain activities due to societal pressure and cultural norms.
somthing will happen If there were no limits on civil liberties, people would have more freedom. People would still feel constrained from certain activities due to societal pressure and cultural norms.
Yes. But this would not protect the person who goes beyond the limits in the US Constitution from prosecution in Federal Court. What the states may not do is impose more restrictive limits on civil liberties or civil rights than those in the US Constitution.
In martial law in the Philippines, you would learn about the rules and regulations imposed by the military government, the suspension of certain civil liberties, the restrictions on movement and communication, and the consequences of violating martial law orders.
the anti federalists
To expand on the answer given above; several hundred checks and balances were designed into the system of government to protect liberties; the people who wrote the constitution and those who worked with them admitted that if these failed it was the power of arms (a gun) that would guarantee they stay in place (loosely quoted from several hundred sources).
The anti-federalists wanted the bill of rights added because they were afraid of "big government." That the Constitution would give the federal government too much power. They wanted to make sure that civil liberties were protected.
Examples of civil liberties would be the five freedoms that are mentioned in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition.
Spanish regain civil liberties