What was a result of the signing of the Magna Carta?

The king was no longer above the law.

His power was increased to include the ability to raise taxes.

The legislative body of England was dissolved.

He enlisted the military to enforce his policies.

Which of the following is true of an unlimited government?

Individual rights and freedoms are restricted.

Citizens can participate in government decisions.

There is the ability to prevent authoritarianism

What statement is true of a limited government?

There are restraints placed upon the power and authority of government.

The citizens are expected to display total obedience to the government as the ruler makes decisions.

There is virtually no ability to limit the actions of the government.

There is no ability to prevent the government from being authoritarian.

Which of the following is true of divine right?

Divine right was based on the idea that a ruler's power came directly from God.

Divine right allowed for restrictions of the decisions made by absolute monarchs.

Divine right gave citizens the right to control the actions of the government.

Divine right was never present among rulers of the 1600s and 1700s.

Which of the following occurred when France and Russia created absolutist systems?

Power was concentrated in the hands of the monarch.

The idea of divine right was crushed.

Limited governments were created in each country.

Rights and freedoms were increased among its citizens.

Which are the characteristics of an absolute monarchies?

the rulers rule under their "divine right", the rulers have all the power, the rulers can change laws, raise taxes, and do anything they please

the people have rights, get to vote, and things are fair

Which of the following was NOT a common way that France and Russia displayed unlimited authority in the 1600s?

They encouraged the development of a market economy so people could own their own business

They dissolved the legislative body.

Which of the following was NOT true for the Roman Catholic Church during the Scientific Revolution?

The new scientific theories were readily accepted by the church.

The teachings of the church were based on faith and revelation.

The teachings of the church and the Bible were called into question.

The political, social, and economic authority of the church was challenged.

Which of the following did NOT occur during the Scientific Revolution of the late 1500s and early 1600s?

Ptolemy presented his idea of a geocentric universe.

Newton founded the laws of gravity and motion.

Copernicus proposed a heliocentric universe.

Galileo improved the telescope to observe space.

Which of the following was developed during the Scientific Revolution?

the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church

the idea of a geocentric universe

Why did many of the Christian churches feel threaten by the Scientific Revolution

During the Scientific Revolution reason and experimentation were encouraged and many of the old beliefs were proven wrong.

During the Scientific Revolution the church was proven correct in many of their beliefs

During the Scientific Revolution many of the population loved musical theater

Which of the following is NOT a step in the scientific method?

testing through experimentation

Limited v Unlimited AND Scientific Rev Review!

Limited v. Unlimited Government

Analyze the significance and outcomes of landmark Supreme Court cases including, but not limited to, Marbury v. Madison, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education, Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, In re Gault, Tinker v. Des Moin

On 8 August 1967, five leaders – the Foreign Ministers of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand – sat down together in the main hall of the Department of Foreign Affairs building in Bangkok, Thailand and signed a document. By virtue of that document, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was born. The five Foreign Ministers who signed it – Adam Malik of Indonesia, Narciso R. Ramos of the Philippines, Tun Abdul Razak of Malaysia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore, and Thanat Khoman of Thailand – would subsequently be hailed as the Founding Fathers of probably the most successful inter-governmental organization in the developing world today. And the document that they signed would be known as the ASEAN Declaration. It was a short, simply-worded document containing just five articles. It declared the establishment of an Association for Regional Cooperation among the Countries of Southeast Asia to be known as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and spelled out the aims and purposes of that Association. These aims and purposes were about cooperation in the economic, social, cultural, technical, educational and other fields, and in the promotion of regional peace and stability through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law and adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter. It stipulated that the Association would be open for participation by all States in the Southeast Asian region subscribing to its aims, principles and purposes. It proclaimed ASEAN as representing “the collective will of the nations of Southeast Asia to bind themselves together in friendship and cooperation and, through joint efforts and sacrifices, secure for their peoples and for posterity the blessings of peace, freedom and prosperity.” It was while Thailand was brokering reconciliation among Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia over certain disputes that it dawned on the four countries that the moment for regional cooperation had come or the future of the region would remain uncertain. Recalls one of the two surviving protagonists of that historic process, Thanat Khoman of Thailand: “At the banquet marking the reconciliation between the three disputants, I broached the idea of forming another organization for regional cooperation with Adam Malik. Malik agreed without hesitation but asked for time to talk with his government and also to normalize relations with Malaysia now that the confrontation was over. Meanwhile, the Thai Foreign Office prepared a draft charter of the new institution. Within a few months, everything was ready. I therefore invited the two former members of the Association for Southeast Asia (ASA), Malaysia and the Philippines, and Indonesia, a key member, to a meeting in Bangkok. In addition, Singapore sent S. Rajaratnam, then Foreign Minister, to see me about joining the new set-up. Although the new organization was planned to comprise only the ASA members plus Indonesia, Singapore’s request was favorably considered.” And so in early August 1967, the five Foreign Ministers spent four days in the relative isolation of a beach resort in Bang Saen, a coastal town less than a hundred kilometers southeast of Bangkok. There they negotiated over that document in a decidedly informal manner which they would later delight in describing as “sports-shirt diplomacy.” Yet it was by no means an easy process: each man brought into the deliberations a historical and political perspective that had no resemblance to that of any of the others. But with goodwill and good humor, as often as they huddled at the negotiating table, they finessed their way through their differences as they lined up their shots on the golf course and traded wisecracks on one another’s game, a style of deliberation which would eventually become the ASEAN ministerial tradition. Now, with the rigors of negotiations and the informalities of Bang Saen behind them, with their signatures neatly attached to the ASEAN Declaration, also known as the Bangkok Declaration, it was time for some formalities. The first to speak was the Philippine Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Narciso Ramos, a one-time journalist and long-time legislator who had given up a chance to be Speaker of the Philippine Congress to serve as one of his country’s first diplomats. He was then 66 years old and his only son, the future President Fidel V. Ramos, was serving with the Philippine Civic Action Group in embattled Vietnam. He recalled the tediousness of the negotiations that preceded the signing of the Declaration that “truly taxed the goodwill, the imagination, the patience and understanding of the five participating Ministers.” That ASEAN was established at all in spite of these difficulties, he said, meant that its foundations had been solidly laid. And he impressed it on the audience of diplomats, officials and media people who had witnessed the signing ceremony that a great sense of urgency had prompted the Ministers to go through all that trouble. He spoke darkly of the forces that were arrayed against the survival of the countries of Southeast Asia in those uncertain and critical times. “The fragmented economies of Southeast Asia,” he said, “(with) each country pursuing its own limited objectives and dissipating its meager resources in the overlapping or even conflicting endeavors of sister states carry the seeds of weakness in their incapacity for growth and their self-perpetuating dependence on the advanced, industrial nations. ASEAN, therefore, could marshal the still untapped potentials of this rich region through more substantial united action

Limited

Related quizzes

Related quizzes