One human right is the right to own property. True or False

(Please vote me Brainliest if this helped!)

This statement is true.

It is started in Article 2 and Article 17.

according to the denotation of “repeat,” history can’t repeat itself. (and if you want to get technical and into chaos theory, neither can anything else.) unlike lab-controlled experiments that can be exactly replicated (although not really), humans are life is always evolving and unpredictable and involves incalculable symbiotic relationships.

but, if we consider “repeat” as both a metaphor and in terms of its connotation, we can understand what people mean by “history repeats itself,” and it actually emerges as a useful conceptual tool. as mark twain put it, “history does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”

the vast, vast majority of people don’t in anyway think that history literally, exactly repeats itself. such would violate celebrated philosophies of free will. when people say that history repeats itself, they are generally thinking of broad patterns. another way to describe these patterns or relationships would be to describe them as cause and effect relationships. they are thinking about the existence of and continuation of

war,

poverty,

colonialism,

racism,

sexism,

classism, or

social movements, to list only a few of the repeated/unending phenomena of human history.a more specific example could be that every step forward in the long african-american civil rights movement has resulted in new forms of discrimination. lynching, disenfranchisement, and neo-enslavement (collectively called “jim crow”) replaced codified plantation and urban enslavement after the civil war and reconstruction era. today, the “new jim crow” (a system where by at least 1 out of every 3 black men are confined in the criminal justice system) replaced jim crow after the modern civil rights movement of the 1940s, 50s, and 60s.

people remain “babies” on the evolutionary ladder – we are greedy, shortsighted, and quick to buy into fear of “the other.” spending time trying to argue that history doesn’t repeat is ultimately not very productive for historians, a debate primarily involving semantic differences.

furthermore, if nothing “repeated,” it would quickly become impossible to study anything. much of what we study is about relationships between times and places. on the other hand, if we “dig deep,” language repeats all the time per se. if we had to relearn language every day, we would never progress. by saying “history repeats,” we are recognizing the ways in which we are bound to this world and products of it. this is not to say that nothing ever improves or changes.

as historians, we can and should use the real meanings behind notions that history repeats to students enjoy and embrace the study of our world. indeed one of the many reasons i enjoy studying history, as i tell students in my “what is history? ” lecture, is that history is comforting and allows us to see the world as a more steady place. according to the news and joe public, crime, poverty, you name it, are worse now than it ever has been. if we look at historical evidence, we can find that such fears are unnecessary. likewise, every generation says the previous generation had it better or older adults long for the time when they were adolescents when the world was a better, safer place (i call this the myth of the utopia past).  

finally, although human events can never come close to any kind of true replication, history belongs to both the liberal arts and the sciences. that history is a liberal art needs no explanation. that history is also a science, however, is where i tend to meet objections.

scientists follow the scientific method. they follow a series of steps to ensure their work is the best it can be given current resources. don’t historians do this? historians come up with questions, look for evidence, analyze evidence, weave in secondary material, write and edit, edit some more, and then go through peer-reviewers both informally and formally. this is indeed the historian’s equivalent of the scientific method. historical narratives or theories about the past are no more or less theories or narratives as human evolution or the big bang, for example. all scholarship involves theory and explanation based on evidence.

likewise, for reasons i haven’t fully grasped or studied yet, science tends to have more credibility with the public. people tend to perceive history as always changing, unstable, and inherently biased by “crazy, liberal academics.” in reality, science changes just as much, is just as unstable, and has just as many biases. in other words, history and any of the specific branches of science are all social constructions- both the discipline themselves and scholarship produced. by promoting the study of the past as a science, perhaps historians would have more automatic credibility.

be sure to check out: the nature of history and the history of history, i am many things but a “history buff” is not one of them. – hidden power of words series, #14, and my other postings about history, too!

explanation:

savannahjax02 hand

one of the strengths of the united nations is their worldwide peacekeeping. they prevent conflict from escalating into war, try to reach agreements between the opposing sides, and bring war to an end as soon as possible. they also have a world food programme which is among the most effective food aid programmes worldwide. the united nations provides food and clean water to people in need, they also send money to strengthen the country's economy. the united nations also provides unaids, which is healthcare to hiv patients. they also raise funds to prevents aids/hivs and the spreads of others diseases. they also have campaigns that show how to protect from certain diseases. the united nations also has the unhcr, the united nations high commissioner for refugees, which is an aid to refugees. it them by raising funds to build up refugee camps or to improve housing and sanitary facilities. it also has many programmes to raise awareness about the refugee crisis and the needs of the refugees. the united nations high commissioner for refugees also builds schools in crisi regions and refugee camps. a major strength of the united nations is its efforts in elucidating the crisis from which it emerged. as such many of the issues which the world was confronted with in 1945 have been addressed. this can be seen with the organization’s mediatory efforts in resolving conflict in territories. intrinsically, particular reference can be observed in the cold war era 1947-1953 where the world was in a state of political and military tension between the powers of the western world led by the united states and the communist world led by the soviet union. as the world was divided east and west, capitalist and communist, us and ussr, the united nations had its first opportunities to establish its role as a mediator in the international system. moreover, the united nations was involved in the establishment of an israeli state on the eastern mediterranean coast. violence erupted between israeli forces and palestinians and their arab allies in response to the foundation of the state of israel. there has also been the promotion of democracy where the united nations has enabled people in many countries to participate in free and fair elections including those held in cambodia, namibia, el salvador and south africa. additionally, there has been the promotion of women’s rights, particularly in middle eastern countries, to have greater control over their lives. the united nations fund for women (unifem) have supported projects in improving the quality of life for women in over 100 countries including marketing opportunities, access to food production and so on.

however, despite these strengths there exist deep seated shortcomings of the organization in the contemporary world. notable of these is the fact that the world today is a different world than the epoch in which the united nations was born. at that time the issues facing the organization was the achievement of peace and security in a world of great powers, the insistence of the united states that the european powers should grant independence and self-government to their colonies and so on. nonetheless, some of these remain but many have changed. the world and its political atmosphere have undergone a massive transformation however the structures of the united nations have remain unchanged. these structures have failed to keep pace with the new demands which must be presently addressed. consequently, given these circumstances the united nations now faces increasing demand for change both in its institutions and in the subject matters of its concern. lastly, another weakness involves that of corruption and mismanagement. there have been reports of a cascade of scandals at the hands of the united nations. most notable of these is the wholesale corruption of the oil-for-food relief program in iraq, disappearance of united nations funds and the exposure of a transnational network of sexual misconduct by united nations peacekeepers in africa. to add, there have been political pressure, favoritism and cronyism plaguing appointments to united nations peace operations. as such it can be examined there exist a culture of impunity where the united nations operates with secrecy and is shielded by diplomatic immunity. consequently, it is no doubt that this result in institutional weakness and a staff that is less than ideally equipped to complete the required tasks. in essence, the united nations as an organization contains both pros and cons in its performance and functions. its strengths emphasizes its utmost importance in the international arena in terms of it neutral stance and mediator efforts however this is questionable when and examination of its weaknesses is undertaken.

word count: 769

mark brainliest