Gezon and Kottak argue that the relatively high incidence of expanded family households among poorer North Americans is
"an adaptation to poverty".
A significantly more typical response from researchers, in any case, was to recommend that discussing the way of life of the underclass was commensurate to "faulting the victim." Bad conduct and poor decisions, in this view, were a justifiable adaptation to poverty and the absence of chance in individuals' lives. In spite of the fact that my examination on the underclass was given a neighborly gathering, the greater part of the scholarly network has mixed around the view that awful practices are a result, as opposed to a reason, of poverty.
Answer:
Redundant
Explanation:
He has has put in redundancy
<span>The phrase actually refers is the what by now should be the well-known history of the U.S. supporting military coups all over South and Central America. Many of the officers involved in the coups with documented violation of human rights were trained by the U.S. in the so-called School of Americas renamed the Western Hemisphere for Institute for Security of Cooperation. </span><span>
</span><span>If you look back at the history of the U.S, you'll see a number of wars or otherwise extensive conflicts averaging every 20-30 years. This rabid aggression and the use of extensive deception are among the reasons U.S. presence is not only resented in Central/South America but currently in areas such as the Middle East.
<em>Hope this helped! :)</em>
</span>
It shows that the president gets to check in on the other branches and see if they are doing something they shouldn'. It shows that the president has a say in the other branches and other branches have a say to his.
