Back to Questions
Want to know:
Who argued that the law of unintended consequences dictates that leaders exercise foresight and proceed cautiously when engaged in political reforms?
Get a detailed, AI-powered explanation for this question and thousands more on StudyFetch.
Get the Answer for FreeHow StudyFetch Helps You Master This Topic
AI-Powered Answers
Get instant, detailed explanations powered by AI that understands your course material.
Deep Understanding
Go beyond surface-level answers with step-by-step breakdowns and examples.
Personalized Learning
Sparky adapts to your learning style and helps you connect ideas.
Practice & Test
Turn any question into flashcards, quizzes, and practice tests to solidify your knowledge.
Explore More Questions
- The Pennsylvania Anti-Federalists object to the process of ratifying the Constitution becausea. members of the Pennsylvania legislature were forced to attend the session that would call a ratifying conventionb. the dissenters at the convention were not allowed to enter on the record their reasons for objecting to the Constitutionc. only ten days were allowed between the call for a convention and election of its members, so there was no time to learn about the proposed Constitutiond. ALL of
- t/f Rejecting laws contrary to Divine Law is more than just a right, it is also a serious duty of conscience.
- There are some nations in Europe whose inhabitants think of themselves in a sense as colonists, indifferent to the fate of the place they live in. The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called "the government." They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved. They are so divorced from their own interests that even when their own security and that of their children is finally compromised, they do not seek to avert the danger themselves but cross their arms and wait for the nation as a whole to come to their aid. Yet as utterly as they sacrifice their own free will, they are no fonder of obedience than anyone else. They submit, it is true, to the whims of a clerk, but no sooner is force removed than they are glad to defy the law as a defeated enemy. Thus one finds them ever wavering between servitude and license.When a nation has reached this point, it must either change its laws and mores or perish, for the well of public virtue has run dry: in such a place one no longer finds citizens but only subjects.