Over two decades have passed since the dissolution of the communist system and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 yet there is still no consensus over the causes and consequences of these epochal (and distinct) events. As for the causes, it is easy to assume that the fall was ‘over-determined’, with an endless array of factors. It behoves the scholar to try to establish a hierarchy of causality, which is itself a methodological exercise in heuristics. However, the arbitrary prioritisation of one factor over another is equally a hermeneutic trap that needs to be avoided. Following an examination of the various ‘why’ factors, we focus on ‘what’ exactly happened at the end of the Soviet period. We examine the issue through the prism of reformulated theories of modernisation. The Soviet system was a sui generis approach to modernisation, but the great paradox was that the system did not apply this ideology to itself. By attempting to stand outside the processes which it unleashed, both society and system entered a cycle of stagnation. The idea of neo-modernisation, above all the idea that societies are challenged to come to terms with the ‘civilisation of modernity’, each in their own way, provides a key to developments. In the end the Soviet approach to this challenge failed, and the reasons for this need to be examined, but the challenge overall remains for post-communist Russia.
Answer:First part: The federal government, under the Articles, was too weak to enforce their laws and therefore had no power. Second part: It influenced the new U.S Constitution that is still the law of the land in the U.S today by allowing the central government certain powers/rights. Congress now has the right to levy taxes. Congress also had the ability to regulate trade between states and other countries.
Explanation:
fue un defensor de la independencia de Puerto Rico y médico. Fue el principal instigador de la revolución de Grito de Lares y es considerado el padre del movimiento de independencia puertorriqueño.
Answer:
hey that is an obsence word
Explanation:
that not good to say
Answer:
The Nazca were contemporary with, and then outlasted, the Paracas culture and many Paracas sites have been discovered beneath Nazca settlements. Politically, the Nazca civilization has been described as a collection of chiefdoms occasionally acting in unison for mutual interest rather than as a single unified state. Or as M.E. Moseley puts it, \\"individuality - with cultural coherence, but without large-scale or integrated power - were Nazca hallmarks\\".