The correct answer is D.
The 13th amendment of the United States Constitution was ratified in 1865, after the American Civil War.
This amendment established the formal abolition of slavery and was approved by President Abraham Lincoln, who had started fighting slavery through the Emancipation Proclamation in 1963.
The process of reasoning to a general conclusion through observation of specific cases is called Inductive Reasoning.
<h3>What is Inductive Reasoning?</h3>
Inductive reasoning is seen as a kind of a process or a method that is known to be used in the drawing of conclusions.
This can be done by going from a particular point to a general point and it is known to be one that is often contrasted with deductive reasoning.
Therefore, based on the above, The process of reasoning to a general conclusion through observation of specific cases is called Inductive Reasoning.
Learn more about reasoning from
brainly.com/question/25175983
#SPJ1
Answer: The Aztecs were violent.
Explanation:
Military campaigns accompanied the very rise of the Aztec civilization. Aztec tribal leaders undertook a series of campaigns to strengthen their influence. Many tribes were turned into vassals who paid tribute to them. Aztec religious beliefs led to many violent deaths. They believed that the gods would bring doom if they did not often sacrifice people, and for this purpose, they often used prisoners of war and members of smaller tribal communities.
Throughout history, they have served as a mercenary army to other cities and states, and over time they have become so strong that they have attacked their masters and become absolute rulers. The state's very structure was militaristic and implied constant expansion, which led to a large number of victims. Many conquered peoples had to pay high taxes, and the Aztecs kept proper records of it. All these factors are proof that the Aztecs were a violent civilization.
Queen Elizabeth 1 knighted Raleigh. He was appointed captain of the Queens guard and later set sail on an unsuccessful search of El Dorado, the legendary city of gold.
Marks explains that we have been made to believe that conflict is bad and compromise is good. He describes this as a vision that is too simplistic to be upheld by the nations of the world. Marks says it will be difficult to determine whether conflict is good or bad if we do not understand the people involved in the conflict, the cause and the strategy involved in the conflict.
He said compromise, contrary to general belief, can be harmful if it does not protect the vulnerable and the dis-empowered.
Marks gave an example of a United Nations agency that collaborated with the federal and local governments, television company, and even a multinational soda company in order to address the problem of poor sanitation in schools in India. This arrangement helped the corporation to promote their brands and products. Marks argued that, the United Nations were creating another problem while trying to solve one by promoting a soda company, knowing fully well that a large consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages increases the risk of obesity.
The mistake governments make, according to Marks, when they collaborate with industries is that they conflate the common good with common ground. They sacrifice the interest of the people on the alter of industrial collaboration.
By saying that governments should struggle or engage in conflicts with corporations, Marks means that the corporations always act to promote their commercial interests while government is saddled with the responsibility of promoting the common good, they should not leave this responsibility while trying to go into relationship with the corporations.
I have had cause to go into conflict with a police officer in my state because he demanded a bribe from me despite having all my driving particulars. I shouted at him and promise to report him to the authority if he did not desist from that practice. he became scared and allowed me to go.
