Similarities and differences in lolita in tehran and persepolis 2

1- in bradbury's  fahrenheit 451, all books are banned and burned upon discovery. in the nazi germany, books considered to be subversive to the regime would be burned to keep the population from generating ideologies that could challenge nazism.

2- was bradbury correct in his literal interpretation of  “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.”? in some way, yes. when knowledge is not only limited, but also controlled, the people tied to it are led to their demise. just like in the novel, people in nazi germany who owned  subversive books were punished not only by the burning of their property, but also by the discrimination that followed after such a public form of consequence. if a person was seen being confiscated  subversive  books, they may be considered as an ally to the jews, which meant pretty much the same as being the enemy back then. because of the extreme exclusion and suffering that followed this punishment, it's almost like dying a slow death.

in this way, the phrase  “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.” is both literal and figurative.

explanation:

mark brainliest and have a great day!

after the civil war, and with the termination of slavery, the south was faced with a big problem; what was supposed to happen and how they were supposed to deal with the freedom and the rights that black people and freed slaves had gained as a result of the north defeating the south and forcing the end of slavery. first, most, if not all, of the workforce of the south came from slaves and they did not have an option to replace the loss of said workforce. second, particularly in the south, people were convinced that black people were lesser, less intelligent, less capable and less smart than whites. this posed a huge problem for them. also, southerners were faced with another issue; freed slaves now had a say in how their lives would be lived and the right to politically choose the way they would be governed. people in the south did not want to accept this, none of this and this opposition and the conflicts that arose from it, not to mention the afereffects of the war, forced the congress of the time to enact and enforce the reconstruction plans that had been proposed by president andrew johnson.

question: write a report analyzing through articles of confederation.

answer: the articles of confederation the united states constitution was written when the people feared strong government the new nation needed some kind of organization to hold states together to them fend off future attacks and make a stronger support system through the states and people the states bonded through a friendship that best served as a defense against a invasion and states were not allowed to use taxes as a way to discourage treaties, and states were extremely limited in their dealings with foreign nations the strengths were that the congress has the highest power in the nation because of   fear of monarchy congress had the sole power to declare war and assign treaties disputes between states and territorial issues were to be brought to congress and weaknesses were the lack of power given to congress the articles gave congress the power to pass laws but no power to enforce those laws if a state did not support a federal law that state could simply ignore it congress had no power to levy taxes or regulate trade.

explanation: so like every argument they have strengths and weaknesses but in this case there were more weaknesses but they managed o get through it and make an agreement

question answered by

(jacemorris04)