“Crime” is not a phenomenon that can be defined according to any objective set of criteria. Instead, what a particular state, legal regime, ruling class or collection of dominant social forces defines as “crime” in any specific society or historical period will reflect the political, economic and cultural interests of such forces. By extension, the interests of competing political, economic or cultural forces will be relegated to the status of “crime” and subject to repression,persecution and attempted subjugation. Those activities of an economic, cultural or martial nature that are categorized as “crime” by a particular system of power and subjugation will be those which advance the interests of the subjugated and undermine the interests of dominant forces. Conventional theories of criminology typically regard crime as the product of either “moral” failing on the part of persons labeled as “criminal,” genetic or biological predispositions towards criminality possessed by such persons, “social injustice” or“abuse” to which the criminal has previously been subjected, or some combination of these. (Agnew and Cullen, 2006) All of these theories for the most part regard the “criminal as deviant” perspective offered by established interests as inherently legitimate, though they may differ in their assessments concerning the matter of how such “deviants” should be handled. The principal weakness of such theories is their failure to differentiate the problem of anti-social or predatory individual behavior<span> per se</span><span> from the matter of “crime” as a political, legal, economic and cultural construct. All human groups, from organized religions to outlaw motorcycle clubs, typically maintain norms that disallow random or unprovoked aggression by individuals against other individuals within the group, and a system of penalties for violating group norms. Even states that have practiced genocide or aggressive war have simultaneously maintained legal prohibitions against “common” crimes. Clearly, this discredits the common view of the state’s apparatus of repression and control (so-called “criminal justice systems”) as having the protection of the lives, safety and property of innocents as its primary purpose.</span>
According to Bailyn's historical interpretation, American revolution was the result of ideological change rather than economic or social motivation.
Explanation:
He states that it is the ideologies and principles and convictions of Americans which proved to be the impetus of the revolution. He states that this ideological scenario can be categorized in to three phases. Firstly, The colonists felt that a conspiracy free relationship with Britain need to be maintained but Americans started to feel the corruption of British government which were totally contradicting the ideologies of Americans.
This made them to plunge into protests. The second scenario occurred when Articles of confederation was established which highlighted the states rights. This was long debated, as these articles of confederation did not serve the purpose during times of Emergency and the third scenario is when the Americans realized the importance of humans as an important part of society and the founding fathers debated that every human carried a natural right which plays a significant role in framing the constitution.
Answer:
A. The US population increased slightly during that time
Explanation:
I believe the answer is: Implements
This mean that the strategist should always ensure that the plant that he/she create not only elaborate, but also executable.
This can be done by designing the plan in several collective steps, which make it easier to divide the job descriptions to execute the plan and clearly convey the responsibilities that held by each executors.
Answer:
the first 2 go on germany
and the last ones from the other side go on france uk and us
Explanation:
