In a well-rounded paragraph, analyze the rise of nationalism as seen in the ideas of sun yat sen, mustafa kemal attaturk, and mohandas ghandi. use examples to discuss each leader's ideology and approaches each used to achieve his goal. you may choose to conduct additional independent research to learn more about the leaders, to support your understanding.

At the top of July 1905, Sun Yat Sen returned to Japan from his trip to Europe and also the us. Received with enthusiasm by the Chinese students and regarded the leader of the anti-Manchu revolutionary movement, Sun took advantage of this new popularity to found a brand new political organization. In Tokyo he established the Alliance Society (同盟會, tóngménghuì, strictly, the Society of the Chinese Revolutionary Alliance), that grouped several revolutionary circles. This society would be the embryo from which the Kuomintang, the most party of Chinese nationalism, would turn in 1911. The formation, of which Sun was named president, disputed with the Chinese constitutional monarchists both the favor of the nationalist youth and therefore the backing of the emigration, which the 2 groups disputed. a brand new newspaper for political formation was created at the time, Min Bao (People's Daily).

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, (Thessaloniki, Ottoman Macedonia, May 19, 1881-Istanbul, November 10, 1938), was a politician of the Turkish army and a famous Turkish statesman, also because the founder and first president of the Republic of Turkey. statesman was consecrated as a renowned general commanding a division within the battle of Gallipoli. After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and also the occupation of Constantinople between 1918 and 1923 at the hands of the Allies and also the partition of the empire, Mustafa Kemal headed the Turkish National Movement, which might cause the Turkish War of Independence.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi Since 1919 he was openly at the pinnacle of the Indian nationalist movement. He established new methods of social struggle like the nonviolence and in his programs rejected the armed struggle and made a preaching of the ahimsa (nonviolence) as a way to resist British rule. He defended and promoted widely the full fidelity to the dictates of conscience, even reaching direct action if necessary; additionally, he fought for the return to the old Hindu traditions. He corresponded with León Tolstoy, who influenced his concept of passive resistance. He was the inspiration for the march of the salt, an illustration across the country against the taxes to which this product was subject.

Explanation:

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.  

anybody wanna play fortnite?