Answer: Door-in-the-face technique
Explanation: This technique is well suited to extort what we need, and in order to get what we need, we first place a request that is much larger than our need, which is usually denied due to a large request. This negative response is usually such that there is no mention of its fulfilment and it is as if someone slammed the door on our face. Much like Jacob's father mocking Jacob's $ 50 claim.
But after that, to our much smaller request, an answer is usually positive, and then we actually get what we need from the beginning, like Jacob $ 20 for gasoline.
Interestingly, scientists claim that, for example, if our second request, much smaller than the first one, was made in isolation, without the first major request, it would not be fulfilled. In other words, if Jacob had immediately claimed $ 20 without first claiming $ 50, his father would not have given him $ 20, according to the scientist. So, the first big request seems to soften the one to whom we are making the request, then the second request will be fulfilled. So did Jacob, to get $ 20 he first asked for $ 50.
Answer:
Wallerstein describes free countries dominating others without being dominated, the semi-periphery country which are dominated while at the same time dominating others, and periphery as the countries that are dominated
Explanation:
There are many ways to attribute a specific country to the free countries or core, semi-periphery, or periphery. Using an empirically based sharp formal definition of "domination" in a two-country relationship.
Piana in the year 2004 was able to define to word Free countries,Semi-periphery,or periphery.
Core : He defined "core" as made up of "free countries" dominating others without being dominated.
Semi-periphery : He defined "semi-periphery" as the countries that are dominated (usually, but not necessarily, by core countries) but at the same time dominating others.
Periphery : He defined "periphery" as the countries dominated.
Whom would be correct double check though
Answer:
c.
Explanation:
the answer is c because the "lobbyist" usually can get votes needed to win an election, with conditions In place. example: a lobbyist on the Republican side influences their supporters to vote on a law to raise taxes.
