The soviet union invaded czechoslovakia and reversed its economic reforms. workers in poland won higher wages after an uprising. yugoslavia parted ways with the soviet union because of political differences. military forces began constructing the berlin wall. pairs 1948 1956 1961 1968

1948-yugoslavia parted ways with the soviet union because of political differences.

1956-workers in poland won higher wages after an uprising.

1961-military forces began constructing the berlin wall

1968-The soviet union invaded czechoslovakia and reversed its economic reforms.

Explanation:

Yugoslavia was actually expelled from the USSR due to the nationalism that its leader Tito had going and he didn´t like many of the policies that the USSR was applying so they were accused of treason and were expelled from the soviet union. In 1956 workers in poland riotted and protested to ask for better working conditions and wages, were the first protests against a communist regime, in august 2nd 1961 the army and military forces of german democratic republic built the berlin wall, and in 1968 the soviet union invaded czechoslovakia reversed its economic reforms.

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

is this like a kind of true or false question?