PROS: people get to choose who they want in office and a democratic gov. often keeps check on corruption, making it less likely to go to war.
CONS: people could vote for someone in office for their selfish needs rather than focusing on the needs of the country as a whole and terms in office could be too short causing views to change often which could lead to an unsteady government.
hope this helps :)
The correct answer is D) unstable external attribution. Attributions are the inferences people make about the causes of events. There are internal/external and stable/unstable attributions.
When people make a stable attribution, they infer that an event due to stable factors. When making an unstable attribution, they infer that an event or behavior is due to unstable, temporary factors.
For example, Lisa gets a F on his sociology term paper. If he attributes the grade to the fact that he always has bad luck, it is a stable attribution. If he attributes the grade to the fact that he didn’t have much time to study, it is an unstable attribution.
Answer:
True!
Explanation:
During the Second World War (1939–1945), India was a part of the British Empire, with the British holding territories in India that included over six hundred autonomous Princely States. British India officially declared war on Nazi Germany in September 1939.[1] The British Raj, as part of the Allied Nations, sent over two and a half million soldiers to fight under British command against the Axis powers. India also provided the base for American operations in support of China in the China Burma India Theater.
Indians fought with distinction throughout the world, including in the European theatre against Germany, in North Africa against Germany and Italy, in the South Asian region defending India against the Japanese and fighting the Japanese in Burma. Indians also aided in liberating British colonies such as Singapore and Hong Kong after the Japanese surrender in August 1945. Over 87,000 Indian soldiers (including those from modern day Pakistan, and Bangladesh) and 3 million civilians died in World War II.[2][3] Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief, India, stated the British "couldn't have come through both wars [World War I and II] if they hadn't had the Indian Army."[4][5]
Viceroy Linlithgow declared that India was at war with Germany without consultations with Indian politicians.[6] Political parties such as the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha supported the British war effort while the largest and most influential political party existing in India at the time, the Indian National Congress, demanded independence before it would help Britain.[7][8] London refused, and when Congress announced a "Quit India" campaign in August 1942, tens of thousands of its leaders were imprisoned by the British for the duration. Meanwhile, under the leadership of Indian leader Subhash Chandra Bose, Japan set up an army of Indian POWs known as the Indian National Army, which fought against the British. A major famine in Bengal in 1943 led to 3 million deaths due to starvation, and a highly controversial issue remains regarding Churchill's decision to not provide emergency food relief.[9][10]
Indian participation in the Allied campaign remained strong. The financial, industrial and military assistance of India formed a crucial component of the British campaign against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.[11] India's strategic location at the tip of the Indian Ocean, its large production of armaments, and its huge armed forces played a decisive role in halting the progress of Imperial Japan in the South-East Asian theatre.[12] The Indian Army during World War II was one of the largest Allied forces contingents which took part in the North and East African Campaign, Western Desert Campaign. At the height of the second World War, more than 2.5 million Indian troops were fighting Axis forces around the globe.[13] After the end of the war, India emerged as the world's fourth largest industrial power and its increased political, economic and military influence paved the way for its independence from the United Kingdom in 1947.[14]
The following sea has almost completely disappeared because of irrigation in the area
<u>The Aral Sea</u>
<u></u>
Explanation:
- The Aral Sea is actually a huge lake, located between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in Central Asia.
- In recent decades, much of the water which used to flow into the Aral Sea has been taken for growing crops. As a result, the Aral Sea has shrunk dramatically. Nearly two-thirds of the lake has vanished since 1970.
- Once the fourth largest lake in the world, Central Asia's shrinking Aral Sea has reached a new low, thanks to decades-old water diversions for irrigation and a more recent drought.
- Satellite imagery released this week by NASA shows that the eastern basin of the freshwater body is now completely dry.
- Today, more people than ever rely on irrigation from rivers that should instead flow into the sea, and the impact of irrigation is compounded by another new factor: climate change. This makes the Aral Sea very sensitive to variations in its water balance caused either by climate or by humans.
For 2021, Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) estimates the mid-year population at 60,14 million people. Approximately 51,1% (about 30,75 million) of the population is female and approximately 48,9% (about 29,39 million) is male.
