All categories

3 years ago

Which action did North Carolina lawmakers take in 1908?

Social Studies

1 answer:

dolphi86 [110]3 years ago

3 0

Option C

They favored prohibition and outlawed alcohol in the state was the action North Carolina lawmakers take in 1908.

Explanation:

The North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control operation arose from powerful and conflicting rivulets of the common notion that reach faraway behind in their records: Certain personalities need to inhale. Others don’t need anyone to inhale.

The anti-liquor units were primed for a statewide plebiscite by 1908. Balloters enact a poll banning throughout the state the production and trade of fermented liquors. North Carolina enhanced the premier land in the South to outlaw the trade and production of fermented liquors and the prime state in the domain to do so by mass vote.

You might be interested in

What breaks down the food we eat

Liula [17]

Answer:

Chewing

Explanation:

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Colonial boycotts of British goods before the Revolutionary War were effective measures because they..

Gekata [30.6K]

Answer:

Colonial boycotts of British goods before the Revolutionary war reduced the profits of the British merchants.

Explanation:

There were laws like Townsend Acts, passed in 1767 imposed taxes on tea, glass, paint, lead import. Colonists protested the same saying that these taxes violated their rights as British citizens. They thus started boycotting British goods i.e. stopped buying them. This boycott of British goods led to a series of boycotts which ultimately led to the American revolution.

Boycotts reduced the profits of British merchants. So, they even petitioned Parliament to revoke the Townshend Acts.

4 0

4 years ago

According to john locke, there exists _____ between the governed and the governing.

MakcuM [25]

C, a moral obligation

8 0

4 years ago

1.) How does justice relate to fairness and

mash [69]

<h2>Question_1. The most fundamental principle of justice—one that has been widely accepted since it was first defined by Aristotle more than two thousand years ago—is the principle that "equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally." In its contemporary form, this principle is sometimes expressed as follows: "Individuals should be treated the same, unless they differ in ways that are relevant to the situation in which they are involved." For example, if Jack and Jill both do the same work, and there are no relevant differences between them or the work they are doing, then in justice they should be paid the same wages. And if Jack is paid more than Jill simply because he is a man, or because he is white, then we have an injustice—a form of discrimination—because race and sex are not relevant to normal work situations.</h2>

<h2>Question-2. Social privilege</h2>

 Social privilege is a theory of special advantage or entitlement, used to one's own benefit or to the detriment of others. These groups can be advantaged based on social class, age, height, nationality, disability, ethnic or racial category, gender, gender identity, neurology, sexual orientation, and religion.It is generally considered to be a theoretical concept used in a variety of subjects and often linked to social inequality.Privilege is also linked to social and cultural forms of power.It began as an academic concept, but has since been invoked more widely, outside of academia.

<h2>Question-3. Racism has been—and unfortunately still is—such a prominent feature of so many human societies that it might be tempting to think of it as somehow "natural" or "innate."</h2><h2 /><h2>Racism has been—and unfortunately still is—such a prominent feature of so many human societies that it might be tempting to think of it as somehow "natural" or "innate."Indeed, this is the conclusion that some evolutionary psychologists have come to. Evolutionary psychology tries to account for present-day human traits in terms of the survival benefit they might have had to our ancestors. If a trait has survived and become prevalent, then the genes associated with it must have been "selected" by evolution.</h2>

<h2>Question_4. The Veil of Ignorance, a component of social contract theory, allows us to test ideas for fairness.</h2>

Like many thought experiments, the Veil of Ignorance could never be carried out in the literal sense, nor should it be. Its purpose is to explore ideas about justice, morality, equality, and social status in a structured manner.

<h2>Question-5. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as amended, protects employees and job applicants from employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.</h2>

<h2>Question-6. They’re surrounded by pieces of the puzzle, but can’t put them together</h2>

<h2>Question-7 The just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias that assumes that "people get what they deserve" - that actions will have morally fair and fitting consequences for the actor. For example, the assumptions that noble actions will eventually be rewarded and evil actions will eventually be punished fall under this hypothesis. In other words, the just-world hypothesis is the tendency to attribute consequences to—or expect consequences as the result of— either a universal force that restores moral balance or a universal connection between the nature of actions and their results. This belief generally implies the existence of cosmic justice, destiny, divine providence, desert, stability, and/or order. It is often associated with a variety of fundamental fallacies, especially in regard to rationalizing suffering on the grounds that the sufferers "deserve" it.</h2>

<h2>Question-8. In game theory terminology, interpersonal trust is associated with the 'type' of the other players (or his own disposition to believe other players), while the institutional trust is related to the rules of the game.</h2>

<h2>Hope this helps you ❤️</h2>

<h2>Mark me as brainliest ❤️</h2>

3 0

3 years ago

What is not true about group decision-making?

AURORKA [14]

An added benefit of group decision making

Explanation:

Group decision-making refers to the technique of making decisions collectively in a group by choosing a best alternative from the given options/alternative.

Groupthink occurs in a group when the group motive is to desire for harmony or conformity in the group results which leads to an irrational or dysfunctional decision outcome.

The answer is Groupthink is not an added benefit of group decision making.

5 0

3 years ago