Divided government: occurs when the governors are unable to reach an agreement about the governance of the country. On that occasion, several different aspects of how the government should act arise, lacking an efficient consensus among politicians and generating strong cases of politicization, which prevents efficient and necessary public policies from being established and voted to allow their execution.
Weak party discipline: Prevents rapid voting on the implementation of public policies. As a result, the implementation of these policies is delayed and precarious. In addition, it makes the work of the federal government more difficult, forcing each parliamentarian to negotiate for these policies separately, making it difficult for political agreements to exist, as the governor starts to act individually.
Growth in the number of interest groups: When a public policy is established and needs to go into the execution process, it is necessary that all government officials work together, which does not happen when interest groups are generated. Each interest group acts individually, seeking personal and not collective benefits.
Political action committees: They can promote the interests of just a group of government officials, generate politicization and polarization of political thought, in addition to generating power gaps that can prevent the implementation of public policies.
Demosthenes was a proud Greek who disliked the Macedonians as a nation, but he also hated the Macedonian people and everyone who lived on that geographical area. What Demosthenes wanted for the city-states was that they would rise up against them - this they eventually did too, so the answer would be; yes, they followed his "advice".
Answer:
<h3>Individualistic fallacy.</h3>
Explanation:
Individualistic fallacy is one among the five fallacies people should avoid when they think about racial denomination. According to Desmond and Emirbayer, it is an <u>individualistic fallacy</u> to think of racism as being only about ideas and prejudices.
In this fallacy, racism is seen as something that emerges from ideas and prejudices. People with this fallacy think that racism is the collection of hateful and prejudiced thoughts that racist individuals have for other groups of people. However, people with this fallacy does not consider the intentionality of a racial act. They think all racial acts are hateful and nasty.
Therefore, Desmond and Emirbayer try to establish that racism is not only about intentional thoughts and actions but it also includes unintentional thoughts and habits that social institutions have implanted.
Answer:
All of them
Explanation:
The king condemning his own peaceful actions to be the cause of violence is in complete contradiction to one another. An oddity occurs and the action is in complete contrast to the outcome. One cannot justify that the corresponding actions may have led to the specific outcome. such is also the case in the example:
a; condemning a robbed man for having too much money does in no way justifies the action of robbing. Blaming a source that was done only for the reason of ones own satisfaction.
b; condemning Socrates for his truth to force people to make him drink the hemlock, is as absurd as the above example.
c; condemning Jesus for his devotion to God shows that the intention of the action was completely different but the outcome was in complete contrast.
