The tone of Langston Hughes's poem "Life Is Fine" is<u> bitter</u> and <u>despairing</u>.
<h3>What is the theme of poem "Life Is Fine"?</h3>
The speaker has expressed the hardships of a man that explains his sadness to the readers. The tone is used as an <u>awakening medium</u> as due to unavoidable failure the speaker tries to end his life.
Therefore, the poem presents duality where the fine word is used as an operative word to show the experience of life even after facing <u>many problems. </u>
Learn more about the poem "Life Is Fine" here:
brainly.com/question/14995766
brainly.com/question/2380219
Answer:
pull factor
Explanation:
The answer is "pull factor".
Pull factor is considered as a factor for migration to other countries or regions for better life prospects.
These are some of the factors which attract people or encourage people to leave their native country and migrate to another country in search of better living standards, good job opportunities, political and religious freedom, environmental safety, etc.
Pull and push factors are two great concerns of today's world which drain many people to other countries. They are generally considered as the north and south pole of the magnets.
Thus the answer is "pull factor".
I would say C) Evaporation
Hope this helps, Good luck! (:
1984. He was given a Special Citation “for his special contribution over nearly half a century to the education and enjoyment of America’s children and their parents.
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
