Answer:
In many respects, the strongest arguments for PR derive from the way in which the system avoids the anomalous results of plurality/majority systems and is better able to produce a representative legislature. For many new democracies, particularly those which face deep societal divisions, the inclusion of all significant groups in the legislature can be a near-essential condition for democratic consolidation. Failing to ensure that both minorities and majorities have a stake in developing political systems can have catastrophic consequences, such as seeking power through illegal means.
PR systems in general are praised for the way in which they:
Faithfully translate votes cast into seats won, and thus avoid some of the more destabilizing and ‘unfair’ results thrown up by plurality/majority electoral systems. ‘Seat bonuses’ for the larger parties are minimized, and small parties can have their voice heard in the legislature.
Encourage or require the formation of political parties or groups of like-minded candidates to put forward lists. This may clarify policy, ideology, or leadership differences within society, especially when, as in Timor-Leste at independence, there is no established party system.
Give rise to very few wasted votes. When thresholds are low, almost all votes cast in PR elections go towards electing a candidate of choice. See Voluntary Party Candidate Quotas to read who may determine the selection process in political parties. This increases the voters’ perception that it is worth making the trip to the polling booth at election time, as they can be more confident that their vote will make a difference to the election outcome, however small.
Facilitate minority parties’ access to representation. Unless the threshold is unduly high, or the district magnitude is unusually low, then any political party with even a small percentage of the vote can gain representation in the legislature. This fulfils the principle of inclusion, which can be crucial to stability in divided societies and has benefits for decision making in established democracies, such as achieving a more balanced representation of minorities in decision-making bodies and providing role models of minorities as elected representatives.
Encourage parties to campaign beyond the districts in which they are strong or where the results are expected to be close. The incentive under PR systems is to maximize the overall vote regardless of where those votes might come from. Every vote, even from areas where a party is electorally weak, goes towards gaining another seat.
Restrict the growth of ‘regional fiefdoms’. Because PR systems reward minority parties with a minority of the seats, they are less likely to lead to situations where a single party holds all the seats in a given province or district. This can be particularly important to minorities in a province which may not have significant regional concentrations or alternative points of access to power.
Lead to greater continuity and stability of policy. The West European experience suggests that parliamentary PR systems score better with regard to governmental longevity, voter participation, and economic performance. The rationale behind this claim is that regular switches in government between two ideologically polarized parties, as can happen in FPTP systems, makes long-term economic planning more difficult, while broad PR coalition governments help engender a stability and coherence in decision making which allow for national development.
Make power-sharing between parties and interest groups more visible. In many new democracies, power-sharing between the numerical majority of the population who hold political power and a small minority who hold economic power is an unavoidable reality. Where the numerical majority dominates the legislature and a minority sees its interests expressed in the control of the economic sphere, negotiations between different power blocks are less visible, less transparent, and less accountable (e.g. in Zimbabwe during its first 20 years of independence). It has been argued that PR, by including all interests in the legislature, offers a better hope that decisions will be taken in the public eye and by a more inclusive cross-section of the society.
Explanation:
Answer:
The capital city of this empire was Tollan-Xicocotitlan, while other important cities included Tulancingo, and Huapalcalco, although some more distant cities like Chupícuaro, Chichen Itza, and Coba seem to have been under Toltec control or influence at some point.
Answer:
The founders of the Song dynasty built an effective centralized bureaucracy staffed with civilian scholar-officials. Regional military governors and their supporters were replaced by centrally appointed officials. ... Song intellectuals sought answers to all philosophical and political questions in the Confucian Classics.
Explanation:
B. Industrial revolution
C. Revolutions of 1848
D. Enlightenment
The Napoleonic War inspired nationalist feelings in European states fighting to resist domination by the French empire.
The Napoleonic War is a series of war events fought by French Empire and their allies against the European states with their coalitions of different kinds. It was led by Napoleon I of the French Empire.
Hence, option A states about the Napoleonic War.
Learn more about the Napoleonic War here:
#SPJ2
The English remained in western forts; American sailors were being pressed into service aboard British ships.
It is a secondary source because it is a textbook article.
It is a primary source because it is a speech.
It is a secondary source because it is a journal or diary.
Answer: it’s a primary source because it is a speech
that’s the correct answer on edge
Explanation:
“Conservation as a National Duty” by Theodore Roosevelt is considered a primary source because it is a speech by a historical figure, providing firsthand evidence about the subject.
“Conservation as a National Duty” by Theodore Roosevelt is a primary source because it is a speech delivered by a historical figure. Primary sources are original, firsthand documents that are not interpretive but provide direct evidence about the topic at hand. Examples of primary sources include diaries, speeches, government documents, and articles written during the time period being studied, like Roosevelt's own accounts in Scribner's magazine. Unlike secondary sources, which interpret or analyze primary sources, a speech by a former president such as Roosevelt commenting on a political issue is a firsthand account representing his view and thus serves as a primary document of its time. The historical context and the authorship of the source, particularly by someone involved in the event, support its classification as a primary source.