I would think its the curves demand
Answer: 1: The person is trying to hid from their little brother Dylan
2: The person was responsible for looking out for Dylan
Explanation: Good luck
The United States must aggressively use moral pressures and propaganda to oppose Russian expansion.
Explanation:
it was the passage taken from the article of liberation policy which was advocated by John Foster Dulles. He states that Russian expansion and communism is a global threat and this spread of communism must be protected and there must be liberation of the people from clutches of communism.
Liberation of the people from the clutches of communism not by violence but by rendering moral pressures which can be thoroughly achieved by psychological force and a strong propaganda against the communism spread. He also states that a purely defensive policy would only end up in war and sacrificing lives. It can never win against the aggressive policy of Soviet communism itself.
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.
