. The historian, Dan Carlin, once suggested that we can only talk about the positive and negative impacts of Mongol rule (like the expansion of the Silk Road and trade) because they ruled in the distant past. No current historian is trying to argue that Stalin's rule over Russia had a positive impact, for example. Do you agree with Carlin's assumption? Do you think that, in the very distant future, historians will be able to dispassionately discuss the positive and negative impacts of modern-day dictators like Muammar Gaddafi, Kim Jong-Un, or even Joseph Stalin?

1. international: struggle for hegemony and empire outstrips the fiscal resources of the state

2. political conflict: conflict between the monarchy and the nobility over the “reform” of the tax system led to paralysis and bankruptcy.

3. the enlightenment: impulse for reform intensifies political conflicts; reinforces traditional aristocratic constitutionalism, one variant of which was laid out in montequieu’s spirit of the laws; introduces new notions of good government, the most radical being popular sovereignty, as in rousseau’s social contract [1762]; the attack on the regime and privileged class by the literary underground of “grub street; ” the broadening influence of public opinion.

4. social antagonisms between two rising groups: the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie

5. ineffective ruler: louis xvi

6. economic hardship, especially the agrarian crisis of 1788-89 generates popular discontent and disorders caused by food shortages.

question 1: a) thurgood marshall

question 2: b) the civil rights act of 1964

question 3: c) brown v board of education

question 4: d) creation of the dept of education

question 5: a) welfare and social security

explanation:

i believe the correct answer is b.