Answer:
Explanation:
Consequentialism is the view that morality is all about producing the right kinds of overall consequences. Here the phrase “overall consequences” of an action means everything the action brings about, including the action itself. For example, if you think that the whole point of morality is (a) to spread happiness and relieve suffering, or (b) to create as much freedom as possible in the world, or (c) to promote the survival of our species, then you accept consequentialism. Although those three views disagree about which kinds of consequences matter, they agree that consequences are all that matters. So, they agree that consequentialism is true. The utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham is a well known example of consequentialism. By contrast, the deontological theories of John Locke and Immanuel Kant are nonconsequentialist.
Consequentialism is controversial. Various nonconsequentialist views are that morality is all about doing one’s duty, respecting rights, obeying nature, obeying God, obeying one’s own heart, actualizing one’s own potential, being reasonable, respecting all people, or not interfering with others—no matter the consequences.
This article describes different versions of consequentialism. It also sketches several of the most popular reasons to believe consequentialism, along with objections to those reasons, and several of the most popular reasons to disbelieve it, along with objections to those reasons.
The Populist Party spoke for farmers and laborists
Oklahoma's economic history is divided into four periods. The first period covers the nineteenth century, encompassing settlement by American Indians of the Southeast followed by new arrangements facilitating private land ownership. The second extends from 1900 to the onset of the Great Depression in 1930. The third ends in 1973 with the first of the major oil shocks. The fourth comprises the energy boom and bust of the late twentieth century, along with contemporary conditions.
The century from 1800 to 1900 encompassed the time of Indian and white settlement. During the nineteenth century Oklahoma was characterized by very high ratios of land to labor and capital, by almost total dominance of primary (natural resource based) production, and by unique institutional and cultural features, of which the effects of some remain important in today's economy. The initial settlement by the Five Civilized Tribes in the 1820s, 1830s, and 1840s in what is now Oklahoma (at that time Indian Territory) did not reflect free-market labor migration in response to income differentials. Added to the coercion of removal was the fact that the Five Tribes had adopted the institution of slavery in their former southern setting. Slave-owning Indians brought with them an additional labor supply.
During the Age of Absolutism, several European monarchs intensified the power of their authority by emphasizing their divine right to rule and A) centralizing their power.
European monarchs clearly undrstood how powerful can get the local regional rulers. Considering the fact that they had armies and could always plot against the crown, monarchs had to do everything to prevent this from happening and establish all sources of power in the capital.
Basically the reason why Vietnam won because the Vietnamese wanted to win more than the Americans did. There were a couple of reasons for this. First, the Americans were an invading force, and the Vietnamese were fighting on their own soil. Second, the Americans were not willing to make an all-out commitment to win.
