By using question that doesn't need an answer<span>s, </span>Thoreau appeals to all American people (who lawfully live in a country, state, etc.)<span>, </span>lifting up/raising up the tone and mood of the text<span>. </span>These questions relate to problems that are universal for all Americans<span> (</span>and all people in general<span>). </span>Question that doesn't need an answer<span>s </span>either don<span>'t </span>have an answer<span>, </span>or<span>, </span>as in this case<span>, </span>they have an obvious one<span>, </span>so that it doesn<span>'t </span>need confirming<span>. </span>However<span>, </span>obvious though it may be<span>,</span>this answer is still related only in your mind (but maybe not in real life) - and that<span>'s </span>what Thoreau was trying to change<span>. </span> <span>Thoreau </span>argues that (system or country where leaders are chosen by votes) should be better than it is now<span>. </span>It shouldn<span>'t </span>be about numbers of people who vote for or against something<span>, </span>but about the (basic, built-in, important qualities/scent) of things<span>, </span>such as human sense of right and wrong<span>. </span>Such as it is<span>, </span>(system or country where leaders are chosen by votes) has gone long way from serving the people (who lawfully live in a country, state, etc.) to becoming an end in itself<span>. </span>It has become (surviving with no outside help) and abandoned/irritated<span>. </span>It has become the state<span>'s </span>tool<span>, </span>rather than the people (who lawfully live in a country, state, etc.)'. "Must the person (who lawfully lives in a country, state, etc.) ever for a moment<span>, </span>or in the least degree<span>, </span>quit his sense of right and wrong to the law-maker<span>?" </span>- The law-maker shouldn<span>'t </span>be more important than the person (who lawfully lives in a country, state, etc.)<span>. </span>The law shouldn<span>'t </span>be more important than justice. "We should be men first<span>, </span>and subjects afterward<span>" </span>- people (who lawfully live in a country, state, etc.) should be perceived in their own right<span>, </span>and not according to their loyalty to the state<span>. </span>In other words<span>, </span>all of us are people<span>, </span>rather than just members of a nation<span>, </span>or people (who vote)<span>. </span> Hoped I Helped
At first Buck tried not to fight with Spitz because he didn't want to set a bad example. Here, Option D is the right choice.
<u>Explanation</u>:
In Jack London’s “The Call of the Wild,” Buck is said to have the DominantPrimordialBeast in him. It means that he had the will to survive as the primary thing in his life. He too was a head of a group of dogs just like Spitz. There was always a sour hatred between the two.
When Spitz attacked any other dogs, Buck would come in between which caused all the animosity. But he always avoided fighting with him as he found it useless and to keep his image among other dofs right.
