Bariefly explain how one specific historical event or development during the period 19933-1939 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support leuchtenbergs interpretation

before there were tanks, machine guns, windmills, and solar panels, the first civilizations emerged that create the history of humanity which provided the larger context for western civilization. uses of weaponry and technology were used very differently in the ancient civilizations than they are today. relating back to the times of the ancient mesopotamian civilization, technology kept advancing throughout the ancient egyptian civilization into the ancient greek civilization, and then finally the ancient roman civilization. as techniques and strategies were past down from civilization to civilization, each shared its own similarities, as well as varied differences. one trait they had in common was to commit violence and economically overpower one another. technology has ultimately advanced due to the knowledge transferred from generation to generation. uses of sophisticated weaponry and devices have created more opportunity for warfare and improvement in the work place. ancient civilizations became more powerful due to the advancements of technology. technology did not only create the use of violence, but it also the economies grow and become stronger, because production of trading goods rose like never before. the rivers, such as the nile, tigris, and euphrates all flourished, as well as destructed civilizations. each civilization had different uses for these rivers, however, some benefited more than others. when analyzing ancient civilizations, there   are things you must understand

explanation:

add me on snap chat miguel-aby much love

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

payments were made after the 1940s.

in the 1980s, a commission held investigations and made recommendations.