1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
enyata [817]
2 years ago
11

How did the government gain control over powerful businesses?

History
1 answer:
muminat2 years ago
6 0

Answer:

the best time to take advantage of this will be in the next couple of years" – the industry got a grip. ... The reforms were about the survival of the NHS in straitened times. ... That's some powerful lobbying from the likes of Monsanto et al.o the extent that businesses did lobby in the 1950s and 1960s (typically ... trying to keep government out of its business (as they did for a long time), ... started, [management] thought government relations did something else.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Mahayana Buddhism sped to which country?
patriot [66]

Answer:

China and India

Explanation:

Mahayana Buddhism is thought to have spread from both China and India during the first and second century into Southeast Asia. Mahayana took root primarily in maritime Southeast Asia, although there was also a strong influence in Vietnam, in part due to their connection with China.

6 0
2 years ago
HELP PLS.The method of analysis in anthropology is the Choose...
vlabodo [156]
The answer should be comparative
7 0
2 years ago
What, according to the author, is an important but onerous civic duty from which women have historically been excluded in the un
slamgirl [31]
According to the author, Registering with selective service is an important but onerous civic duty from which women have historically been excluded in the United States. Affirmative action” means positive steps taken to increase the representation of women and minorities in areas of employment, education, and culture from which they have been historically excluded.
5 0
3 years ago
Will give brainliest please help asap
Yakvenalex [24]
I think the answer would be C
4 0
3 years ago
Why might violence be tempting to activists? Why might it be risky to their movements?
Neko [114]

Answer:

We agree with a number of Thaler’s points. First, he is right to question those on the outside who tell activists what to do or offer strategic or tactical advice. Local activists know their context best, and specific instructions from outside actors can place activists at great risk. People struggling under such conditions often say they learn the most from being in touch with other activists. But when activists approach scholars or practitioners for information or resources, it is crucial to make sure that a broad range of experience and evidence are publicly available and accessible. That was the purpose of a recent event hosted by the United States Institute of Peace that featured various scholarly and activist perspectives on how movements respond to repression.

Second, we appreciate how the article highlights the role of human agency in the struggle against authoritarianism and other forms of oppression. Civil resistance offers a way for marginalized and excluded groups to wage struggle using a wide range of direct-action tactics that can be used to disrupt injustices and challenge the status quo. It is more than simply an ideal or a normative preference. We also recognize that when activists seek out support or information, they decide for themselves whether the information is relevant to their context, or whether to discard it.

Third, we share his denunciation of repressive state violence targeting unarmed civilian dissenters. It is a regrettable reality that states often respond to those who challenge state power with violent repression, regardless of which methods of resistance they use. This state violence should never be normalized, nor should false moral equivalences or “both sides”-type narratives be tolerated. Outside actors should stand in solidarity with those fighting oppression and prioritize actions that protect fundamental human rights and mitigate violence targeting unarmed dissidents.

Yet we differ on other important points. First, critics often claim that nonviolence is part of a Western hegemonic discourse that reinforces the legitimacy of state violence while simultaneously encouraging oppressed people to carry the unfair burden of good behavior under crushing conditions. Discourses advocating nonviolent resistance are in no way hegemonic, nor are they Western in origin. Over the millennia, states and nonstate groups have justified violence on the basis of its necessity, used cultural relativism as a way to prevent critiques of violence, and persecuted, imprisoned, and executed those who have advocated nonviolent approaches, which threaten two hegemonic discourses—the state’s monopoly on power, and the normalcy and necessity of violence.

Nonviolent resistance has been a counterhegemonic force that challenges both of these dominant discourses. The technique was developed and embraced by people living under colonial regimes throughout the global south, as well as by marginalized and oppressed communities within the West. Despite their views that violence was preferable to passivity, practitioners such as Mohandas Gandhi and Badshah Khan saw mass civil resistance as the only way for them to challenge the violence of Western imperialism on pragmatic grounds. Over the course of the past century, the technique spread from the global south to the United States and Europe, where people fighting racism, sexism, poverty, war, authoritarianism, and economic inequality have seen the strategic value of fighting structural violence by building and wielding inclusive power from below using nonviolent resistance.

Activists from around the world continue to make arguments about the strategic utility of nonviolent resistance, without any nudging from Westerners or Western researchers. Protesters facing a massive crackdown in Baghdad attempted to maintain nonviolent discipline by shouting “Peaceful! Peaceful!” while under fire from security forces. Women in Lebanon have organized human chains to maintain nonviolent discipline in the ongoing movement there, which is now in a particularly delicate phase. Dissidents associated with the Sudanese Revolution insisted on maintaining a remarkable level of nonviolent discipline, despite bloody crackdowns attempting to throw the transition into disarray. And in Algeria, the ongoing movement there has remained both disruptive and restrained in its use of violence.

Our book, Why Civil Resistance Works, presents evidence that mass, broad-based participation is critical to movement success and that movements that rely primarily on nonviolent tactics tend to enjoy more diverse participation, which in turn yields a number of political advantages for the campaign. Updated analyses reinforce these earlier findings, and other research helps to unpack these dynamics at a more granular level.

Explanation:

5 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • During the industrial revolution, how did economics drive political change?
    10·1 answer
  • Can someone please help me with this?
    7·1 answer
  • What is Hammurabi's code?
    9·1 answer
  • What did Gandhi try to do during his "nonviolent noncooperation" movement?
    14·1 answer
  • Explain feudalism for social studies​
    11·1 answer
  • Based on our comparison between human rights issues in Africa and Asia which of the
    15·1 answer
  • FREE BRAINLIEST! if you can answer this correctly ill give you brainliest and answer some of the questions you have posted :) th
    8·1 answer
  • What is Romantic music for you?​
    10·1 answer
  • Use the drop-down menus to complete each sentence.
    10·1 answer
  • The state calling for National Guard help
    11·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!