Answer:
Andrew Carnegie was extremely wealthy having built a personal fortune from steel. He was a philanthropist and believed in giving back to the community but he still maintained control of where and how to donate. The kind of projects he prioritized did little to directly help the class of people who struggle daily like coal miners.
Explanation:
Andrew Carnegie was known as a philanthropist, he felt it was his duty or obligation to give back to the community as a wealthy person. But he was also the wealthiest man in the world in 1901 when he retired. There is a big disparity between his life and the life of average coal miner who had to struggle in the mines and risked their health and lives because the earnings were a bit higher than other options for the poorer or working class at the time, particularly where there was coal mining in the Appalachians and around Pittsburgh, for example. This philanthropic view was not ethical because it was the wealthy man himself who still decided where the money was to be donated or invested and in the kind of services it would provide. Carnegie donated to museums and libraries in the Pittsburgh area for example, and while valuable in themselves they do little to improve the quality of life for working class people directly, like coal miners. Although Carnegie did respond personally to some families in the Harwick Mine Disaster for example, having medals privately minted for the families of two miners who gave their lives trying to save the others. Carnegie also gave $5 million to establish a Carnegie Hero Fund (note how the gesture was branded in the sense even in giving it carries the Carnegie name). But 181 people died in that accident that was indicative of other sacrifices many countless other coal miners made to help amass his personal fortune.
Answer:
Nativism, assimilation, and cultural preservation are terms that help explain the relationship between mainstream society and minority groups, as well as new immigrants coming into a society.
Explanation:
The connection between nativism, assimilation, and cultural preservation are like different sides of the same coin regarding culture and society. Nativism is the idea that there is a core culture in a home country that needs to be shored up and protected vis-a-vis the arrival of outsiders or newcomers. It is the grounding of xenophobic ideas where there is a fear of outsiders and an active rejection of them on some level. Assimilation is when people who are newcomers adapt to the dominant culture and take up their values, practices and beliefs. Cultural preservation is used to protect cultural links to heritage and the past whether this be for majority populations or minorities like in the case of Native American groups and protection of their cultural heritage and lifeways vis-a-vis the mainstream.
The answer to number 1 is b and the answer to number 2 is c
Answer:
Peer group
Explanation:
Peer group -
It refers to the combination of people , combined together because of some common interest , is referred to as a peer group.
This group tries to attract and influences other person to join and follow their group .
A peer group can be good as well as bad in belief .
Hence , from the given scenario of the question ,
The correct answer is peer group .
