Emmeline Pankhurst was an activist in the United Kingdom during the early 1900s. She was a leader of the suffrage movement that helped gain women the right to vote. In 1912, Pankhurst and several other suffragettes tried to burn down the Royal Theater in Dublin, Ireland, after the British prime minister had gone to a performance there. Over the next two years, suffragettes set fire to several buildings in the United Kingdom. Some people felt that Pankhurst's approval of the violence turned the public against the suffrage movement, but ultimately the UK Parliament granted all women the right to vote in 1928. Interpretation 1 — Pankhurst was justified in using violence because it kept the women's rights movement in the public eye. Interpretation 2 — Pankhurst should not have used violence because it turned people away from supporting the women's rights movement. Which statement best compares the two interpretations of Emmeline Pankhurst's actions?

pope john paul ii ( his real name is karol wojtyla) and lech walesa ( the leader of the solidarity movement ) were both born in poland.

imperialism and colonization in 1936

part of the politics series

basic forms of government

power structure

separation

associated state dominion chiefdom

federalism

federation confederation devolution

integration

empire hegemony unitary state

administrative division

power source

democracy

power of many

direct representative liberal social demarchy others

oligarchy

power of few

anocracy aristocracy plutocracy kakistocracy kraterocracy stratocracy timocracy meritocracy technocracy geniocracy noocracy kritarchy particracy ergatocracy netocracy

autocracy

power of one

despotism dictatorship military dictatorship

others

anarchy theocracy

power ideology

monarchy vs. republic

socio-political ideologies

absolute legalist

constitutional

parliamentary directorial semi-presidential presidential

authoritarian vs. libertarian

socio-economic ideologies

tribalism despotism feudalism colonialism distributism anarchism socialism communism totalitarianism

global vs. local

geo-cultural ideologies

commune city-state national government intergovernmental organisation world government

politics portal

vte

an empire is a sovereign state functioning as an aggregate of nations or people that are ruled over by an emperor or another kind of monarch. the territory and population of an empire is commonly of greater extent than the one of a kingdom.[1]

an empire can be made solely of contiguous territories, such as the austro-hungarian empire or the russian empire, or of territories far remote from the homeland, such as a colonial empire. aside from the more formal usage, the word empire can also refer colloquially to a large-scale business enterprise (e.g. a transnational corporation), a political organisation controlled by a single individual (a political boss), or a group (political bosses).[2] the word empire is associated with such other words as imperialism, colonialism, and globalization. empire is often used to describe a displeasure to overpowering situations.[3]

answer: both considered peasants valued members of society.

explanation: the ancient chinese and indian empires were large asian empires that had the same problems with other big empires, they had to work hard and sometimes fight in order to keep them united, they both relied heavily on their capacity to trade and to send strange and rare items to europe, and had the father as the head of the house hold in both societies, but they didn´t considered pleasants as valued members of their society, they were the bottom of the social pyramid in both of their societies.

i think your answer is c.

i think.

sorry if its wrong!