How long did it take for angela to get access to the small island controlled by the usa?

What did the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty accomplish in 1963? It outlawed all nuclear testing in all parts of the world. It stopped n

Vadim26 [7]

The treaty was signed by Russia, Great Britain, and the US to no test anywhere especially the atmosphere water or under ground.

The correct answer is A!

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

How accurate is it to say that the main reason for the survival of the Soviet regime, in

tamaranim1 [39]

Answer:it is pretty accurate

Explanation:Without the new Economic policy the Soviet Regime would have never survived.

8 0

3 years ago

What impact did the criminal laws in Hammurabi's Code have? Select all that apply. (2 points)

Margaret [11]

I think the best answer from the choices listed above is option A. The impact that the criminal laws in Hammurabi's Code have would be that they ensured that slaves did not suffer persecution. Hammurabi's code, a fine example of the "an eye for an eye" mentality of justice, was established in order to please the gods he worshiped.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Explain what gave other Europeans the courage to begin fighting against their own oppressive leaders.

yan [13]

This chapter, which analyses the theories of cultural action which develop from antidialogical and dialogical matrices, will make frequent reference to points presented in the previous chapters, either to expand these points or to clarify new affirmations.

I shall start by reaffirming that humankind, as beings of the praxis, differ from animals, which are beings of pure activity. Animals do not consider the world; they are immersed in it. In contrast, human beings emerge from the world, objectify it, and in so doing can understand it and transform it with their labor.

Animals, which do not labor, live in a setting which they cannot transcend. Hence, each animal species lives in the context appropriate to it, and these contexts, while open to humans, cannot communicate among themselves.

But human activity consists of action and reflection: it is praxis; it is transformation of the world. And as praxis, it requires theory to illuminate it. Human activity is theory and practice; it is reflection and action. It cannot, as I stressed in chapter 2, be reduced to either verbalism or activism.

Lenin's famous statement: "Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement"1 means that a revolution is achieved with neither verbalism nor adtivism, but rather with praxis, that is, with reflection and action directed at the structures to be transformed. The revolutionary effort to transform these structures radically cannot designate its leaders as its thinkers and the oppressed as mere doers.

If true commitment to the people, involving the transformation of the reality by which they are oppressed, requires a theory of transforming action, this theory cannot fail to assign the people a fundamental role in the transformation process. The leaders cannot treat the oppressed as mere activists to be denied the opportunity of reflection and allowed merely the illusion of acting, whereas in fact they would continue to be manipulated—and in this case by the presumed foes of manipulation.

The leaders do bear the responsibility for coordination and, at times, direction—but leaders who deny praxis to the oppressed thereby invalidate their own praxis. By imposing their word on others, they falsify that word and establish a contradiction between their methods and their objectives. If they are truly committed to liberation, their action and reflection cannot proceed without the action and reflection of others.

Revolutionary praxis must stand opposed to the praxis of the dominant elites, for they are by nature antithetical. Revolutionary praxis cannot tolerate an absurd dichotomy in which the praxis of the people is merely that of following the leaders decisions—a dichotomy reflecting the prescriptive methods of the dominant elites. Revolutionary praxis is a unity, and the leaders cannot treat the oppressed as their possession.

Manipulation, sloganizing, "depositing," regimentation, and prescription cannot be components of revolutionary praxis, precisely because they are components of the praxis of domination. In order to dominate, the dominator has no choice but to deny true praxis to the people, deny them the right to say their own word and think their own thoughts. He and she cannot act dialogically; for to do so would mean either that they had relinquished their power to dominate and joined the cause of the oppressed, or had lost that power through miscalculation.

5 0

3 years ago

-Monotheistic

solniwko [45]

Answer:

b.

Explanation:

please click the heart and rate excellent and pa brainleist po please ☻❤☺️☺️❤☻

8 0

3 years ago