Answer:
This is an example of C. Past-in-present discrimination.
Explanation:
Past-in-present discrimination is a term used to describe the present effects of discrimination that minority groups suffer, due to past discrimination. Most of the discriminatory practices that were legal in the past are no longer allowed, such as the incapability of certain minority groups to own a house, but they have effects that people continue to live with in the present.
In this case, that people couln't own a home has impacted their net worth, although in the present they are allowed to buy a house, which proves that making these discriminatory practices ilegal is has not been enough to close the wealth gap between white Americans and other minority groups, or even the wealth gap between men and women.
It's definitely not in a theocracy: those usually favour the majorities.
Also migrant labors don't specifically favour minorities.
Now, between democracies and command economies the choice is very hard, as it depends more on the specific country. So for example in many places the role of the minorities rose in command economies, since they went against the patriarchy (in China this was the case for example, the role of women in China improved drastically, while women and minorities are still struggling in Japan, which is a democracy). On the other hand, Nazi Germany was also a command economy, and yet it was very bad for minorities
I would say that the question is too complex to give just one answer, but I would also argue for option d)
True it’s hotter in Africa than it is in Antarctica right??
