Answer:
I believe you're asking about the Marxist criticism. Well, Marxist criticism came from various political ideologies and academic disciplines. These include general criticisms about the lack of internal consistency, criticisms related to historical materialism, the need to suppress individual rights, issues with the implementation of communism and economic issues such as distortion or the absence of price signals and reduced incentives. Also, empirical problems are often identified.
Explanation:
The main criticism of Marxism today claims that it has a simplistic character, be it in the organization of society into classes (capitalist and proletariat), or in the various interpretations that Marx makes of the direct interrelation between social factors of conscience (such as culture, religion and political) and those of the economy. According to some of these critics, economic reasons are also insufficient to explain modern phenomena such as man's search for status, even though it does not represent any economic advantage.
Option A, turkey is the right answer.
A long-term benefit of the Columbian Exchange was the improvement in the diet of the people of Europe. Not only the Europeans were benefited by the Columbus exchange but also the Native Americans benefited greatly from the technology that the Europeans brought over to the New World. Native Americans shared Turkeys, Alpacas and other items with Europeans which signifies a mutual relationship.<u> Colonial Exchange plays a substantial part in the history of America. </u>
It was tragedy and comedy to show life can be serious and it can be fun
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. It was decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton. The Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacyunder the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's interests in regulating abortions: protecting women's health and protecting the potentiality of human life.[1] Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the third trimester of pregnancy.
Later, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), the Court rejected Roe's trimester framework while affirming its central holding that a woman has a right to abortion until fetal viability.[2] The Roe decision defined "viable" as "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid."[3] Justices in Casey acknowledged that viability may occur at 23 or 24 weeks, or sometimes even earlier, in light of medical advances.[4]
In disallowing many state and federal restrictions on abortion in the United States,[5][6] Roe v. Wade prompted a national debate that continues today about issues including whether, and to what extent, abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, what methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication, and what the role should be of religious and moral views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade reshaped national politics, dividing much of the United States into pro-abortion and anti-abortion camps, while activating grassroots movements on both sides.
