Which situation was one reason why democracy developed in athens

an era of negotiation.

is that an answer to your question?

1. the townshend acts of 1767 “threaten the country with poverty and ruin.”

at a town meeting held at faneuil hall in boston on october 28, 1767, boston freeholders and residents discussed the implications of the brutal townshend acts levied against the colonists. the townshend acts were a set of four acts passed by the british parliament in the summer of 1767 in order to generate revenue for the crown (through duties on goods such as lead, glass, paper, and tea) as well as exert british control over the increasingly rebellious colonists.

during the oct. 28 meeting, the bostonians found:

the excessive use of foreign superfluities is the chief cause of the present distressed state of this town, as it is thereby drained of its money: which misfortune is likely to be increased by means of the late additional burthens and impositions on the trade of the province, which threaten the country with poverty and ruin.

as a result, the citizens unanimously voted to boycott all british-made goods.

during the debate over his landmark energy policy proposal, president jimmy carter failed to consult one of the most powerful senators, louisiana’s russell long, who would have a big say over whether the legislation moved through the upper chamber. this was classic carter. with a strong distaste for congressional politics, the president simply refused to do what most other presidents would consider routine, such as courting key senators. long became so irate with the president that when he was finally invited to a white house dinner, he stood up to ask a question and, before doing so, proceeded to sarcastically introduce himself: “i’m russell long, chairman of the senate finance committee.”

this interaction is a revealing moment in stuart e. eizenstat’s fascinating new history of carter’s presidency. the former peanut farmer from georgia was a president who, according to conventional wisdom, didn’t care much for party politics; nonetheless, in eizenstat’s view, carter’s legacy on domestic and foreign policy has been vastly underappreciated. the author paints carter as a “bold and determined” leader who bravely attacked the challenges of his time. eizenstat goes so far as to argue that carter might very well be the most successful one-term president in american history.