Not only were the initial colonists in the Chesapeake region lazy and unambitious but their aspirations were also hindered before they even got started. A single plant provided an answer to these issues. However, the colonists eventually ran into a lot of issues as a result of this cash crop.
<h3>Who are Colonists?</h3>
The practice of colonialism involves one country assuming complete or partial political control over another and settling there with settlers in order to take advantage of that country's resources and economy. It might be challenging to tell colonialism from imperialism because both involve the political and economic dominance of a dominating country over a weak territory. From the dawn of time until the beginning of the 20th century, strong nations fought openly for control of new territories through colonialism. By the time World War I broke out in 1914, nearly every continent had been colonized by European nations. Although colonialism is not as actively implemented as it once was, there is evidence that it still has influence in the modern world.
Thus, yes the colonists in the Chesapeake region were lazy and ignorant.
For more information on Chesapeake, refer to the given link:
brainly.com/question/5231025
#SPJ4
Answer:
Minutemen were civilian colonists who independently formed militia companies self-trained in weaponry, tactics, and military strategies, comprising the American colonial partisan militia during the American Revolutionary War. They were known for being ready at a minute's notice, hence the name.
The aim of the Perestroika in the Soviet Union was to make the Socialism system there more efficient, so that the goods produced are actually the ones needed (but it ended up changing the system altogether)<span />
Answer:
Through the diverse cases represented in this collection, we model the different functions that the civic imagination performs. For the moment, we define civic imagination as the capacity to imagine alternatives to current cultural, social, political, or economic conditions; one cannot change the world without imagining what a better world might look like.
Beyond that, the civic imagination requires and is realized through the ability to imagine the process of change, to see one’s self as a civic agent capable of making change, to feel solidarity with others whose perspectives and experiences are different than one’s own, to join a larger collective with shared interests, and to bring imaginative dimensions to real world spaces and places.
Research on the civic imagination explores the political consequences of cultural representations and the cultural roots of political participation. This definition consolidates ideas from various accounts of the public imagination, the political imagination, the radical imagination, the pragmatic imagination, creative insurgency or public fantasy.
In some cases, the civic imagination is grounded in beliefs about how the system actually works, but we have a more expansive understanding stressing the capacity to imagine alternatives, even if those alternatives tap the fantastic. Too often, focusing on contemporary problems makes it impossible to see beyond immediate constraints.
This tunnel vision perpetuates the status quo, and innovative voices —especially those from the margins — are shot down before they can be heard.
The correct answer is Universal conduct, based on Universal values
Happiness is the state in which a rational being is found in the world for whom, in all his existence, everything goes according to his desire and will; consequently, it presupposes the agreement of nature with all the ends of this being, and simultaneously with the essential foundation of determining its will. Now the moral law, as a law of freedom, obliges by means of foundations of determination, which must be entirely independent of nature and its agreement with our faculty of desire (as an engine). However, the rational agent that acts in the world is not simultaneously the cause of the world and of nature itself. Thus, in the moral law, there is no basis for a necessary connection between morality and happiness, provided with it, in a being that, being part of the world, depends on it; this being, precisely for this reason, cannot voluntarily be the cause of this nature nor, as far as happiness is concerned, make it, by its own strength, perfectly coincide with its own practical principles.
