it was called the gleiwitz incident
Unfortunately for the French though is recognized it Louis XVI was especially the nobles at the top who where useless and did not contribute to society of efficiency above all else and even criticized the kings palace at Versailles
Answer:
Body Ritual Among the Nacirema tells the story of a strange lifestyle and the rituals of this particular lifestyle. The first thing Miner writes about is every household having a “shrine room” where rituals that are secret from everyone else are practiced and how every shrine room has a box with many magical potions. The most important potions are described to be obtained from the medicine man but they don’t directly give them the medicine. The people get a piece of paper with the medicine written on it in a secret language and they take this to someone else to get the potions. Does any of this sound a bit familiar? It should, because Miner is talking about the American culture. Nacirema is American spelled backwards. The “shrine room” Miner describes is the bathroom and the box with magical potions is the medicine cabinet. This discription of that are common to the American culture are depicted throughout the article to add effect.
Horace Miner uses a unique approach to help us (Americans) realize different things about our culture. This story is trying to get us to look at our own culture from the outside sine we are always thinking we are normal but other cultures are very strange. When in reality, we are just as strange as other cultures are to us. I feel that Miner wants us to realize that we should learn to respect other culture’s beliefs, lifestyles, and daily rituals even when they seem odd to us. Body Ritual Among the Nacirema can also be related to the article from the Inquiry reader Shakespeare in the Bush in the sense that people are the same everywhere because of our perceptions but most of all because of our inability to see our own short comings.
The Americans resented their mistreatment (taxation without representation) after the French & Indian War, but they had won and weren't involved in a war in 1775. The Russians were reeling from their 1905 loss to the Japanese and they were suffering from WW1 in 1917.
<span>The americans rebelled against King George III, who was depicted as a tyrant, although he wasn't really all that bad. The Russians rebelled against Czr Nicholas II, who was quite a tyrant. </span>
<span>By July 1776 the Americans wanted independence and self-rule; by November 1917 the Russians wanted a worker-run state and self-rule. </span>
<span>American leaders were mostly wealthy landowners and businessmen; Russian leaders were a middle-class lawyer (Lenin), newspaper writer (Trotsky) and a bank-robber/soldier (Stalin).</span>
Answer:
binding arbitration would end unrestricted economies all through a large part of the economy. Government authorities could direct wages and working conditions to any organization sufficiently disastrous to be coordinated.
binding arbitration would do the same amount of harm to laborers' privileges. They would lose all resources as of now accessible to them. Endorsers would lose their entitlement to decide on sanctioning the agreement they should work under, and they couldn't strike over the last agreement, regardless of how awful it is. Restricting intervention gives laborers an agreement if they like it.
binding arbitration could likewise cost laborers their annuities. Associations are probably going to press the mediator to constrain recently coordinated specialists to join a multi-manager association benefits plan, and in enterprises where these plans are normal, the judge would almost certainly concur.
Explanation:
With organization enrollment in consistent decay, Coordinated Work faces a decision. It can accomplish the difficult work important to shed the New Arrangement model that actually shapes its obsolete approach and adjust to the present economy. Or on the other hand it can utilize its political muscle and get Congress to make it simpler to constrain laborers to join.
