What are the "two opposing forces: King discusses in this section? How does King's discussion of these two forces serve his purpose? King discusses the force of complacency and the force of bitterness and hatred to show how oppression has affected the block community.
Answer:
Sure no problem. I also ran it through Gramarly Premium word check and phrase.
Before:
In The Alchemist, the spiritual unity represented by the Soul of the World binds together all of nature, from human beings to desert sand. This idea underlies the parallel we see in the novel between the alchemist purifying metal into gold and Santiago purifying himself into someone capable of achieving his Personal Legend. According to the novel, the Soul of the World has created an ultimate desire, or Personal Legend, for everything, whether Santiago or a piece of iron. To accomplish its Personal Legend, each thing must learn to tap into the Soul of the World, which purifies it. That continual purification ultimately leads to perfection. This notion of humans, metals, and all other things sharing the same goal demonstrates that all elements in nature are essentially different forms of a single spirit."
After:
In The Alchemist, the profound solidarity addressed by the Soul of the World ties together the entirety of nature, from people to abandon sand. This thought underlies the equal we find in the novel between the chemist refining metal into gold and Santiago cleaning himself into somebody equipped for accomplishing his Personal Legend. As per the novel, the Soul of the World has made an extreme craving, or Personal Legend, for everything, regardless of whether Santiago or a piece of iron. To achieve its Personal Legend, every thing should figure out how to take advantage of the Soul of the World, which decontaminates it. That consistent refinement eventually prompts flawlessness. This thought of people, metals, and any remaining things having a similar objective exhibits that all components in nature are basically various types of a solitary soul."
Can I have brainliest?
The best counterclaim for Taney's statement would be <em>"Because Dred Scott and his family were born in the United States, they are citizens with all the rights granted by Constitution"</em>
<em> </em>This counterclaim can be found in the Citizenship Clause (1868), present in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution -<em> "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." </em> -that, by the time Dred Scott v. Sandford courts' decision it didn't existed yet. The Citizenship Clause act as a reparation to African Americans, who were seen before only as a object and private good.
<em> </em>
Number 1 is your answer hope this helps.
Enroching meeans that something that intudes and have power to influnce whatever it wants
