C seems to be right a is totally wrong
Two main assumptions of functional theory and conflict theory are Social stability, social integration and social class and gender.
<h3>What are the major assumptions of functional and conflict theories?</h3>
- Functionalism: Social stability is key to have a strong society, and adequate socialization and social integration are necessary to achieve social stability.
- Conflict theory: Society is full of pervasive inequality based on social class, gender, and other factors.
<h3>How can each theory be used to understand the North American international auto show held in Detroit each year?</h3>
The theory, functional theory for instance, can be used to understand it by knowing that Society’s social institutions perform important functions to help ensure social stability. The essence of such show is to bring about social stability
Similarly, Conflict theory can help understand that far-reaching social change is needed to reduce or eliminate social inequality and to create an egalitarian society.
Therefore, while functional theory is used to understand the show for social stability, the other theory, conflict theory, us used to bring about social equality.
learn more about social equality: brainly.com/question/24131981
#SPJ1
Answer:
1798 and were authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison,
Explanation:
The Virginia Resolution, authored by Madison, said that by enacting the Alien and Sedition Acts, Congress was exercising “a power not delegated by the Constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a power, which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is leveled against that right of freely examining public characters
Bolivar stood apart from his class in ideas, values and vision. Who else would be found in the midst of a campaign swinging in a hammock, reading the French philosophers? His liberal education, wide reading, and travels in Europe had broadened his horizons and opened his mind to the political thinkers of France and Britain. He read deeply in the works of Hobbes and Spinoza, Holbach and Hume; and the thought of Montesquieu and Rousseau left its imprint firmly on him and gave him a life-long devotion to reason, freedom and progress. But he was not a slave of the Enlightenment. British political virtues also attracted him. In his Angostura Address (1819) he recommended the British constitution as 'the most worthy to serve as a model for those who desire to enjoy the rights of man and all political happiness compatible with our fragile nature'. But he also affirmed his conviction that American constitutions must conform to American traditions, beliefs and conditions.
His basic aim was liberty, which he described as "the only object worth the sacrifice of man's life'. For Bolivar liberty did not simply mean freedom from the absolutist state of the eighteenth century, as it did for the Enlightenment, but freedom from a colonial power, to be followed by true independence under a liberal constitution. And with liberty he wanted equality – that is, legal equality – for all men, whatever their class, creed or colour. In principle he was a democrat and he believed that governments should be responsible to the people. 'Only the majority is sovereign', he wrote; 'he who takes the place of the people is a tyrant and his power is usurpation'. But Bolivar was not so idealistic as to imagine that South America was ready for pure democracy, or that the law could annul the inequalities imposed by nature and society. He spent his whole political life developing and modifying his principles, seeking the elusive mean between democracy and authority. In Bolivar the realist and idealist dwelt in uneasy rivalry.
