All of these are authoritarian governments except D. Direct Democracy
kathmandu was a single political unit during the early period of of malla rule but after the end of the yakshya malla it was divided into three states,namely kantipur ,patan and Bhadgaon. similarly , there were kiranti kingdoms in the east and tirhut in the south.
1. Railroad can now give supplies better but now many are homeless
2. Think of it simplistically, if an employer can pay 5 people with $10 each (just an example), and then now the employer is forced to give each person $12.50, that means he’s now forced to lay off one of those 5 people so the other 4 people can have $12.50 each.
Basically it results in employees making more money, but also that other employees suffer and lose their jobs because of it. People want to raise minimum wage until they lose their jobs lol
You have to do all of them for the reward
<span>At the core of most intractable conflicts are deeply rooted divisions affecting parties' fundamental interests, needs and values. These include irreconcilable moral values, matters of justice and human rights, high-stakes distributional issues, unmet human needs, and issues of identity. Such conflicts tend to be protracted and have very damaging effects.IntroductionIntractable conflicts are ones that remain unresolved for long periods of time and then become stuck at a high level of intensity and destructiveness. They typically involve many parties and concern an intricate set of historical, religious, cultural, political, and economic issues.[1] These matters are central to human social existence and typically resist any attempts at resolution. In fact, parties often refuse to negotiate or compromise with respect to such issues. As a result, each side views the rigid position of the other as a threat to its very existence. They may develop a mutual fear of each other and a profound desire to inflict as much physical and psychological harm on each other as possible.[2] This sense of threat and hostility often pervades the everyday lives of the parties involved and overrides their ability to recognize any shared concerns they might have.<span>
Additional insights into the underlying causes of intractable conflicts are offered by Beyond Intractability project participants.</span>As conflict escalates, any tangible issues may become embedded within a larger set of values, beliefs, identities, and cultures. Disputes about land, money, or other resources may take on increased symbolic significance.[3] Over the course of conflict, the original issues can even become irrelevant as new causes for conflict are generated by actions within the conflict itself. Those on opposing sides come to view each other as enemies and may resort to highly destructive means. Eventually, the parties become unable to separate different issues and may see no way out of the conflict other than through total victory or defeat.[4]Why do some conflicts become intractable? Many describe intractability in terms of the destructive relationship dynamics that govern the adversaries' interaction. For example, if one party resorts to inhumane treatment in waging conflict, this deepens antagonism and may lead the opposing side to seek revenge.[5] Likewise, when extremist political leaders appeal to ethno-nationalist ideology to arouse fear, this may increase support for the use of violence and contribute to intractability. Other factors that make some conflicts extremely difficult to resolve include the vast numbers of people involved, the large number of complex issues to be resolved, and a previous history of violent confrontation. But what are the underlying causes of these destructive conflict dynamics?What is common to all intractable conflicts is that they involve interests or values that the disputants regard as critical to their survival. These underlying causes include parties' moral values, identities, and fundamental human needs. Because conflicts grounded in these issues involve the basic molds for thought and action within given communities and culture, they are usually not resolvable by negotiation or compromise.[6] This is because the problem in question is one that cannot be resolved in a win-win way. If one value system is followed, another is threatened. If one nation controls a piece of land, another does not. If one group is dominant, another is subordinate.While sharing is possible in theory, contending sides usually regard compromise as a loss. This is especially true in societies where natural fear and hatred is so ingrained that opposing groups cannot imagine living with or working cooperatively with the other side. Instead, they are often willing to take whatever means necessary to ensure group survival and protect their way of life. Below are brief summaries of some of the central underlying causes of intractable conflict.</span>
