What is sectionalism, and how did its presence in the United States lead to compromise

answer: born in saint-dié, in the vosges department, france, he studied law, and was called to the bar at paris in 1854,[2] but soon went into politics, contributing to various newspapers, particularly to le temps. he attacked the second french empire with great violence, directing his opposition especially against baron haussmann, prefect of the seine department. a series of his articles in le temps was later republished as the fantastic tales of haussmannlaxupa (1868).[2]

explanation:

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is

to demand women’s suffrage

the wants of children today than in colonial times are very different. as well as the roles. children now have electronics such as phones, tablets, tvs, etc. back then, kids didn’t have electronics. in the colonial times, children were expected to their parents in their work. but now, children are expected to go to school.

hope i

-lavira : )