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
Sveta_85 [38]
3 years ago
15

Mario Benedetti “¿qué pasaría si de pronto una injusticia, sólo una, es repudiada por todo, que somos todos, no unos, no algunos

, sino todos?”
¿qué te dice está frase respecto a la fuerza que puede tener la humanidad?

porfavor es para hoy ​
Social Studies
1 answer:
NikAS [45]3 years ago
6 0

La respuesta correcta para esta pregunta abierta es la siguiente.

Mario Benedetti expreso: “¿Qué pasaría si de pronto una injusticia, sólo una, es repudiada por todo, que somos todos, no unos, no algunos, sino todos?”

Lo que esta frase dice respecto a la fuerza que puede tener la humanidad es que si en algún momento la humanidad dejara atrás diferencias, problemas, agendas personales, egoísmos y rencores, tendría la fuerza necesaria como para derrocar gobiernos corruptos, exigir transparencia en las decisiones de los gobernantes, exigir mejores oportunidades de vida para todos, entre otras muchas cosas.

El problema es que los humanos estos divididos por religiones, partidos políticos, etnias, razas, puntos de vista, estratos sociales y demás divisiones que solo nos debilitan como humanos.

Así, divididos y débiles, el humano es dócil y fácil de gobernar.

You might be interested in
Read these lines of poetry: An empty chair underneath a torn-up piece of paper— My sadness spreads as smooth and soft as a vapor
pantera1 [17]
I'm guessing C. <span>"My sadness spreads as smooth and soft as a vapor."</span>

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What does the Preamble promise to do for the people of this country? How has it succeeded, and how has it failed?
Advocard [28]

Answer:

The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution—the document’s famous first fifty-two words— introduces everything that is to follow in the Constitution’s seven articles and twenty-seven amendments. It proclaims who is adopting this Constitution: “We the People of the United States.” It describes why it is being adopted—the purposes behind the enactment of America’s charter of government. And it describes what is being adopted: “this Constitution”—a single authoritative written text to serve as fundamental law of the land. Written constitutionalism was a distinctively American innovation, and one that the framing generation considered the new nation’s greatest contribution to the science of government.

The word “preamble,” while accurate, does not quite capture the full importance of this provision. “Preamble” might be taken—we think wrongly—to imply that these words are merely an opening rhetorical flourish or frill without meaningful effect. To be sure, “preamble” usefully conveys the idea that this provision does not itself confer or delineate powers of government or rights of citizens. Those are set forth in the substantive articles and amendments that follow in the main body of the Constitution’s text. It was well understood at the time of enactment that preambles in legal documents were not themselves substantive provisions and thus should not be read to contradict, expand, or contract the document’s substantive terms.  

But that does not mean the Constitution’s Preamble lacks its own legal force. Quite the contrary, it is the provision of the document that declares the enactment of the provisions that follow. Indeed, the Preamble has sometimes been termed the “Enacting Clause” of the Constitution, in that it declares the fact of adoption of the Constitution (once sufficient states had ratified it): “We the People of the United States . . . do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Importantly, the Preamble declares who is enacting this Constitution—the people of “the United States.” The document is the collective enactment of all U.S. citizens. The Constitution is “owned” (so to speak) by the people, not by the government or any branch thereof. We the People are the stewards of the U.S. Constitution and remain ultimately responsible for its continued existence and its faithful interpretation.

It is sometimes observed that the language “We the People of the United States” was inserted at the Constitutional Convention by the “Committee of Style,” which chose those words—rather than “We the People of the States of . . .”, followed by a listing of the thirteen states, for a simple practical reason: it was unclear how many states would actually ratify the proposed new constitution. (Article VII declared that the Constitution would come into effect once nine of thirteen states had ratified it; and as it happened two states, North Carolina and Rhode Island, did not ratify until after George Washington had been inaugurated as the first President under the Constitution.) The Committee of Style thus could not safely choose to list all of the states in the Preamble. So they settled on the language of both “We the People of the United States.”

Nonetheless, the language was consciously chosen. Regardless of its origins in practical considerations or as a matter of “style,” the language actually chosen has important substantive consequences. “We the People of the United States” strongly supports the idea that the Constitution is one for a unified nation, rather than a treaty of separate sovereign states. (This, of course, had been the arrangement under the Articles of Confederation, the document the Constitution was designed to replace.) The idea of nationhood is then confirmed by the first reason recited in the Preamble for adopting the new Constitution—“to form a more perfect Union.” On the eve of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln invoked these words in support of the permanence of the Union under the Constitution and the unlawfulness of states attempting to secede from that union.

The other purposes for adopting the Constitution, recited by the Preamble— to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”—embody the aspirations that We the People have for our Constitution, and that were expected to flow from the substantive provisions that follow. The stated goal is to create a government that will meet the needs of the people.

Explanation:

Your welcome

6 0
2 years ago
Why does jews consider jerusalem a holy land ?
lyudmila [28]
Jerusalem is one of the oldest cities on earth and has been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times. Judaism, christianity, and Islam all mark the cite as  the location for events that are intrinsic to the founding of each religion. In the Jewish quarter of the city is the Western wall, also called the wailing wall and the dome of the rock which is said to contain the first building block of the earth. It is considered the holiest of holies/ 
3 0
3 years ago
One good reason to vote is to express your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the people who hold office.
Lilit [14]

Answer:

true

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
every statistic shows that people with a college education.make much more money over their working years , and are much happier
Stella [2.4K]

Answer: This statement could be both true and false because other factors come into play when several people with these characteristics are questioned.

Explanation:

Happiness is something relative since for each thing happiness represents something different. For many, happiness has to do with reaching the highest position in their workplace, for others, it is having a child and for others, it is simply having health. In the case of the statement expressed above, in some cases, the happiest people are those who have gone to college and have more money which is because many times happiness is associated with the amount of money a person makes. When a person has a good amount of money, he can buy the things he likes, help his family and cover expenses in case of an eventuality, which provides security and the person can feel better what in other cases translates to happiness. But there are also people who, although they have not reached a high educational level, have a fixed income of money and other elements, can also represent happiness.

The poorest communities may indeed in many cases not feel happy because they do not have money to buy something that is needed in the house such as food or a comfortable bed to sleep in, this causes discomfort and cannot be translated as happiness. Since happiness is relative, one cannot simply deduce that because a person has a good education and earns a lot of money, he will be happy, but compared to another with low resources to a certain degree, since happiness would be related to meeting present needs.

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Psychologists who emphasize the importance of personality traits are most often criticized for
    14·1 answer
  • To help remember the key terms used to describe pavlov's conditioning a dog to salivate to the sound of a bell, joshua vividly i
    9·1 answer
  • Someone please help me
    9·2 answers
  • New cities used modern sewage systems that helped control diseases
    13·1 answer
  • What invention of eli whitney's was instrumental in helping develop an agrarian society in the south
    8·1 answer
  • GIVING BRAINLIEST
    13·2 answers
  • Why was the railroad system important to westward expansion?
    12·1 answer
  • What is the illegal hunting and killing of animals called?
    13·2 answers
  • Help please...
    15·2 answers
  • How is everyone doing today ?
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!