Marks explains that we have been made to believe that conflict is bad and compromise is good. He describes this as a vision that is too simplistic to be upheld by the nations of the world. Marks says it will be difficult to determine whether conflict is good or bad if we do not understand the people involved in the conflict, the cause and the strategy involved in the conflict.
He said compromise, contrary to general belief, can be harmful if it does not protect the vulnerable and the dis-empowered.
Marks gave an example of a United Nations agency that collaborated with the federal and local governments, television company, and even a multinational soda company in order to address the problem of poor sanitation in schools in India. This arrangement helped the corporation to promote their brands and products. Marks argued that, the United Nations were creating another problem while trying to solve one by promoting a soda company, knowing fully well that a large consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages increases the risk of obesity.
The mistake governments make, according to Marks, when they collaborate with industries is that they conflate the common good with common ground. They sacrifice the interest of the people on the alter of industrial collaboration.
By saying that governments should struggle or engage in conflicts with corporations, Marks means that the corporations always act to promote their commercial interests while government is saddled with the responsibility of promoting the common good, they should not leave this responsibility while trying to go into relationship with the corporations.
I have had cause to go into conflict with a police officer in my state because he demanded a bribe from me despite having all my driving particulars. I shouted at him and promise to report him to the authority if he did not desist from that practice. he became scared and allowed me to go.
A groundskeeper who moves from a school to a church and remains a groundskeeper is experiencing horizontal mobility.
A sort of social mobility known as horizontal mobility describes a person's ability to shift from one similar group or status to another while maintaining their economic circumstances, reputation, and way of life.
Moving within the same status group is known as horizontal mobility. This can be seen, for instance, in the case of a nurse who transfers to another hospital from one. Moving up or down a social hierarchy is known as vertical mobility.
To learn more about horizontal mobility, visit here
brainly.com/question/359904
#SPJ4
Answer:
The continuation of the balance between slave and free states was important given the nature of the Congress and the balance of power between the competing sides in the issue. ... Compromises were needed to equalize the power between proslavery and antislavery interests in the government to keep the Union together.
Explanation:
Put it in your own words.
He came to power when he was drunk at a bar then started saying what he believed and all the other drunks in the bar agreed and the paraded around the city at night saying that and that helped bring him to power
