Answer:
The U.S. government made reservations the centerpiece of Indian policy around 1850, and thereafter reserves became a major bone of contention between natives and non-natives in the Pacific Northwest. However, they did not define the lives of all Indians. Many natives lived off of reservations, for example. One estimate for 1900 is that more than half of all Puget Sound Indians lived away from reservations. Many of these natives were part of families that included non-Indians and children of mixed parentage, and most worked as laborers in the non-Indian economy. They were joined by Indians who migrated seasonally away from reservations, and also from as far away as British Columbia. As Alexandra Harmon's article "Lines in Sand" makes clear, the boundaries between "Indian" and "non-Indian," and between different native groups, were fluid and difficult to fix. Reservations could not bound all Northwest Indians any more than others kinds of borders and lines could.
Answer:
The Premack principle
Explanation:
Given by David Premack in 1965.
This principle is based on Operant Conditioning (reinforcement).
The Premack principle states that the chance of getting involved in more predictable activities or behaviors will reinforce less predictable activities or behaviors.
In the given eg. Jean is applying reinforcement, as he asked her daughter that she can play outside after eating fruits.
Answer:
It’s density increases and it’s volume increases.
Explanation:
The mass does not change, and the density and volume increase.
I believe the answer is: Recidivism
Recidivism refers to The tendency for criminal to repeat the offense that made them convicted in the first place.
Many experts believe This happen because the prison system in united states do not add enough educational value for the inmates to change their behaviors/way of thinking.
Answer:
a. the military-industrial complex.
Explanation:
More than 50 years ago, President Eisenhower was saying goodbye to US citizens. In his last speech, broadcast on radio and television on January 17, 1961, he warned his countrymen about the serious implications of a new conjunction in American history: "the conjunction of a huge military establishment and a large armaments industry," the Industrial-Military Complex.
At the time of the farewell, the country was at the height of the Cold War and was threatened by a power capable of incinerating the American territory in a huge nuclear fire. Military spending at that time, the president said, consumed "more than the net profits of all US corporations." With this budget at the disposal of the Complex, the general spoke of an influence on American society that went beyond the economic and political sphere, even spiritual - an elegant way to say that co-optation corrupted even the soul.
