Do you think that Machiavelli presents a convincing argument? What evidence is most compelling? Decide what additional points, if any, might have strengthened his argument. Cite details in your answer.

Read the excerpt. … in lower burma, i was hated by large numbers of people. … i was subdivisional police officer of the town, and … anti-european feeling was very bitter. … as a police officer i was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so. … i had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing. … i was all for the burmese and all against their oppressors, the british. what is the situational irony in the excerpt from “shooting an elephant” by george orwell? the narrator is a british police officer and part of the system he dislikes. the narrator is himself a well-liked member of the burmese government. the narrator has recently become a burmese citizen. the narrator has decided to leave the british empire.

Chan was leading a group discussion in his university. he discovered that a few participants were dominating the discussion and not letting others speak. what should chan do in such a situation a. chan should allow participants to speak until they are finished b. chan should adjourn the discussion and recommence at a later point c.chan should bar the dominant participants have the freedom to share their opinion d.chan should ensure that all participants have the freedom to share their opinion e.chan should restructure the group so that the dominant participants are isolated

Using the library or the internet as a resource, locate and watch two different live production interpretations of act iii of our town. then, compare and contrast how the two interpretations represented the original play. did either of the interpretations make any changes to the original material? if so, how did it affect your experience as a viewer? did you interpret the characters any differently after watching the live productions? why or why not?