Answer:
Once the race is understood as a social construct, several policies and social issues will be created to regulate the members of that race, and traditionally these policies create segregation and prejudice.
Explanation:
I think that two good examples to illustrate this point is the Jim Crow system in the Southern of the USA, and the eugenics policies executed by the Nazis. Both were influenced by the racial racism that emerged in the late 18th century but became strong in the 19th century. When we analyze their practices, it's clear the idea of segregation, to create a strong race, to avoid the racial mixture, but above all else, to control races considered degenerated or dangerous, avoiding their spread. This happened with black people on the US (Jim Crow system), and with the Jews and several other social/racial minorities in Europe under the shadow of the Nazis.
Answer:
Dress code is nessassery,
Explanation:
Dress code is nessassery but people shouldn't be shamed. Girls should not show there breasts but not show there stomachs either. A little expose is okey but to the point nipple is almost out is inappropriate. Now boys do get away with alot but they should be wearing shirts and be wearing above the knee shorts. If someone is Gay the school should not sham but show support. If someone has a bad personality you should not give them detention you should make something else fun without continued influening bad behavior. But if someone has a good sweet and gentle personality there usually bullied. I'm not joking. But you should always not show favorites because someone will be Self Observed or feel worse about themselves then that causes bulling to develop.
IM NOT DOING DRAWING.
Answer:
They help us power stuff, like our vehicles, homes, devices, factories, and all that jazz
Explanation:
Answer:
1. Klu Klux Klan and the union
2. Happiness
3. I am not sure on this answer sorry.
4. Powerful
5. My best answer would be the Klu Klux Klan
Explanation:
I tried my best. If you have any more questions let me know.
“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>
