In pre-WW2 Japanese culture, there existed a strict social hierarchy. One of the lowest things one could do in said hierarchy, is surrender. This was seen as dishonorable, and lowered one’s potion to lower than dogs. Any sign of disobedience and hesitation to the captor by the prisoner was seen as disrespectful, and accordingly.
Answer:
hi how are you
The Missouri River would have flowed north across Canada. There would be no Hudson’s Bay. The Ohio River would not exist. Instead the “New” River of West Virginia would have flowed north to the St. Lawrence. There would be no Great Lakes.
The British colonies would have remained hemmed in along the Atlantic. There would be no easy access to the Mississippi and the interior might well have remained solidly French. If you did somehow get to the Mississippi, there would be no Missouri River to take you to the Rocky Mountains. There would be no Detroit, Chicago or Milwaukee.
you meant something like that?
A series of assessments will be made on a regular basis to monitor human influence on Antarctica.Controls are in place to regulate the admittance of any plant or animal life not endemic to the continent. It also severely limits the amount of contact humans have with indigenous flora and fauna.The third rule limits the kind and amounts of waste present on the continent. This includes chemicals, fuels, and plastic. In this manner, human-made pollutants cannot harm the environment.This important rule prohibits ships traveling within the Antarctic Treaty area from throwing away or discarding chemicals, oil, trash, or toxic waste into the ocean.the Madrid Protocol has designated specific areas on the continent that are distinct ecosystems or historic sites. Admittance to these regions is highly regulated and takes special permits.
<span> It also places limits on how food waste can be removed from ships.</span>
To force someone into military or national service by means of conscription. Feudal levies a form of medieval conscription.
It's clear that one of the systems does not work. Corruption and failure are not strangers to either system, but one of them has a higher success rate to prove its point.
The first argument is pretty simple. Socialism has never worked. From that view, it is pretty clear that empirical evidence suggests that socialism usually ends up turning into an oppressive pseudo capitalist corporatism, as it has happened in South America repeatedly, or it will become a dictatorship, as it has happened in South America, Africa and even to Russia and its neighbor countries.
Socialism, to work, has to have state force using firearms to impose their will upon the others. It smashes the will and freedom of minorities, and by minorities I mean anyone who disagrees with them, and forces them, with the raw and physical power of the State, to behave accordingly.
Capitalism, though, is all about competition and voluntarism when it is not infected with the corrupted politicians that ally themselves with big companies, making an ugly son that we call corporatism. But even when that is the case, people tend to have something to eat, that can't be said about current Venezuela and North Korea.
