The Plains Indians were almost totally dependent upon the bison. They were a source of food, shelter, utensils, and clothing and most importantly spiritual strength. The American bison sacrificed its life to keep the American Indian in existence.
The ~unequal~ statuses of different individuals in a society. for example, a doctor has a higher social status than a janitor working at the same hospital. the doctor might be awarded for his work, while the janitor is mostly ignored. the doctor may also have come from a fairly wealthy family and received a good education, while the janitor may have had economic disadvantages and a poor quality education. so the doctor and the janitor are socially unequal. social inequality is very closely connected to economic inequality, so if you ever see the phrase "socio-economic inequality," that's why.
1. We can analyze the possible social benefits or consequences by creating a standard that deemed as 'desirable' social situation and measures the situation before and after the militarization.
If after the militarization our society got closer to the desirable outcome, we would say that the militarization produces a social benefit.
2. We could take a look at the example of American military occupation in Iraq.
Initially, we intended for the militarization to create a democratic country in iraq after we remove the dictator from power.
But it only resulted in a vacuum that attract many radical groups to came in to control the country. In this case, we can conclude that the militarization produce more consequences than benefit.
<span>
The president can veto laws that the prime minister passes.
The president can veto laws, but the prime minister doens't pass any laws, the parliament does (false)
The president can order the prime minister to switch jobs with him or her.
The president can dismiss the prime minister but cannot appoint them a president: the president is chosen in an election (false)
The president can make himself prime minister and hold both offices.
I don't think this is true, as the prime minister is also the next for presidency; in case of death or incapacitation of the president, the prime minister will become the president. (false)
The president can dismiss the prime minister and appoint a new one.
This is true, the president</span> approints and dismisses the prime minister
