Governed in a parental way by providing for their needs but not giving them rights.
That answer is relative. By 1920's standards they were treated very well. After all there was a reason so many fled from the United States to Canada. Blacks have a deep history in Canada. Canada in 1819 was one of the first to declare Canadian Blacks were free. They were and are one of the many Nations and cultures that built today's Canada. By today's standard they were not treated well, or not as well as they could have been. Typical of the age many Canadians held very racial views of people. To them a persons race decided many things. In some cases it meant that the "races" should not mix. In others it meant only certain races should have access to government programs or jobs and could fulfill only certain roles. Sometimes there was open hostility but racial discrimination acts were being passed in the first half of the the 20th century showing that the government and most of the people did not support such racism.
1)The USA should avoid alliances with other nations 2) Americans should focus on issues at home, such as depression 3)Complete neutrality was the way to keep the USA safe 4)Intervention in a foreign war would be a mistake just as world war 1 was.
They should be more involved in social causes. (APEX)
That people should give up there natural rights (social contract)
The opposite of ethnocentrism is cultural relativism, which is the belief that all cultures have value and should be understood and judged based on their own standards and beliefs rather than comparing them to one's own culture.
A person is not "judged" insane. Insanity is used as a defense in a criminal trial. A jury must decide,after hearing the evidence, if the defendant should be considered insane or not.
Cultural relativism is the belief that an individual's beliefs and behaviors should be understood within the context of their own culture, rather than judged against the standards of another culture. It emphasizes the importance of respecting cultural differences and understanding diverse perspectives.
Wrong. There are standards and laws and when someone crosses a line they should be judged. Without these standards society in there is chaos and there is a need to know right from wrong.
You are very right no one should be judged its a natural thing to be judged no one should be judged on any condistion
you should not be judged by you answer because its your decision on what you say or do.. <3 xx
How should art be judged? What are the values of art?
It is not accurate or respectful to label an entire country as "uncivilized." Every country has its own unique cultures, traditions, and societal norms that should be understood and appreciated rather than judged in such a manner. It is important to approach different cultures with an open mind and avoid stereotypes.
Aesthetics (ehs-THEH-tiks) - the philosophical study of art that explores fundamental questions, such as ¨What is art?¨ and ¨What is beauty?¨
This is a confusing question but I'll do my best. Jim Carrey should not be judged by by us or other people, but he will be judged by God on judgment day, as will everyone else.
What standards of evidence should journalist
People should try and be the best at whatever they do. This shows maturity and responsibility. People are judged by their actions, and if someone doesn't do their best, they will be negatively judged by others.