Answer:
Through the diverse cases represented in this collection, we model the different functions that the civic imagination performs. For the moment, we define civic imagination as the capacity to imagine alternatives to current cultural, social, political, or economic conditions; one cannot change the world without imagining what a better world might look like.
Beyond that, the civic imagination requires and is realized through the ability to imagine the process of change, to see one’s self as a civic agent capable of making change, to feel solidarity with others whose perspectives and experiences are different than one’s own, to join a larger collective with shared interests, and to bring imaginative dimensions to real world spaces and places.
Research on the civic imagination explores the political consequences of cultural representations and the cultural roots of political participation. This definition consolidates ideas from various accounts of the public imagination, the political imagination, the radical imagination, the pragmatic imagination, creative insurgency or public fantasy.
In some cases, the civic imagination is grounded in beliefs about how the system actually works, but we have a more expansive understanding stressing the capacity to imagine alternatives, even if those alternatives tap the fantastic. Too often, focusing on contemporary problems makes it impossible to see beyond immediate constraints.
This tunnel vision perpetuates the status quo, and innovative voices —especially those from the margins — are shot down before they can be heard.
Answer:
I think it means the baby in the womb
Answer:
Option D
NGOs are not officially affiliated with any country's government
Explanation:
NGOs are non governmental organisations, They are most of the time, founded by private parties who are normal citizens of the country usually with the aim of solving a societal problem or contributing to the development of the society.
In terms of ownership structure, NGOs are as a matter of fact, owned by private individuals, and as their name implies, are not officially affiliated with the government of any country. They are usually charity organisations, which receive funds from free will donations, rather than sale of goods and services
Answer:
3. Freedom of speech
Explanation:
In the case of Schenck v. United States (1919) concerned protest activities against American involvement in World War I. Justice Oliver Holmes, Jr. said that trying to convince draft-age men to resist induction was intended to result in a crime, and posed a "clear and present danger" of succeeding. The Supreme Court decision in the case related to a freedom of speech. In the case of Schenck v. United States (1919), it was mentioned that speech which creates clear and present danger is not protected under the first amendment. In this case Supreme court highlighted that the power of the federal government over an individual's right to freedom of speech.
The porpuse of government it's the administrations,in all areas