How much violence is acceptable in a revolution?

just as does the closely related NRA doctrine that, under the Second Amendment, revolution is sometimes justified. The word "sometimes" opens a panorama of moral doubt: when is violence, including revolutionary violence, justified

Explanation:

pizarro staged a mock trial and found atahualpa guilty of revolting against the spanish, practicing idolatry, and murdering huáscar, his brother. atahualpa was sentenced to execution by burning. he was horrified, since the inca believed that the soul would not be able to go on to the afterlife if the body were burned.

when christopher columbus arrived on the bahamian island of guanahani (san salvador) in 1492, he encountered the taíno people, whom he described in letters as "naked as the day they were born." taíno influences survived, however, and today appear in the beliefs, religions, language, and music of caribbean cultures.

ad 1492: taíno meet columbus; “new world” gets new diseases. in the bahamas, the taíno are 125,000 strong in 1492 when they encounter the crew and the italian captain of three spanish ships. christopher columbus seeks a shorter sea route to india to spain get a foothold in the profitable spice trade.

hope this

p.s plz make me a brinties

the ottoman empire was dwindling and two large to manage

explanation: