Loading...
PARTITIVE RELATIONS
Quiz by Princess Karen Nipales
Customize this quiz to suit your class
Instantly translate to 100+ languages
Tag the questions with any skills you have. Your dashboard will track each student's mastery of each skill.
Give this quiz to my class
​How much does a _________strawberry jam in Baguio cost?
jar
slice
loaf
bottle
​Marilyn helped herself to a __________of pizza
ounce
pizza
crumb
grain
How much does a _________strawberry jam in Baguio cost?
Marilyn helped herself to a __________of pizza
There was a _____________of bread in the kid’s mouth.
Take a ________of medicine for your cough
Only a ______of water came out from the faucet.
Fed. 51: To the People of the State of New York: TO WHAT expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution? The only answer that can be given is, that as all these exterior provisions are found to be inadequate, the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their proper places. Without presuming to undertake a full development of this important idea, I will hazard a few general observations, which may perhaps place it in a clearer light, and enable us to form a more correct judgment of the principles and structure of the government planned by the convention. In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another. Perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. Some difficulties, however, and some additional expense would attend the execution of it. Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them. It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal. But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State. But it is not possible to give to each department an equal power of self-defense. In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit. It may even be necessary to guard against dangerous encroachments by still further precautions. As the weight of the legislative authority requires that it should be thus divided, the weakness of the executive may require, on the other hand, that it should be fortified. An absolute negative on the legislature appears, at first view, to be the natural defense with which the executive magistrate should be armed. But perhaps it would be neither altogether safe nor alone sufficient. On ordinary occasions it might not be exerted with the requisite firmness, and on extraordinary occasions it might be perfidiously abused. May not this defect of an absolute negative be supplied by some qualified connection between this weaker department and the weaker branch of the stronger department, by which the latter may be led to support the constitutional rights of the former, without being too much detached from the rights of its own department? If the principles on which these observations are founded be just, as I persuade myself they are, and they be applied as a criterion to the several State constitutions, and to the federal Constitution it will be found that if the latter does not perfectly correspond with them, the former are infinitely less able to bear such a test. There are, moreover, two considerations particularly applicable to the federal system of America, which place that system in a very interesting point of view. First. In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments. In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself. Second. It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority that is, of the society itself; the other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable. The first method prevails in all governments possessing an hereditary or self-appointed authority. This, at best, is but a precarious security; because a power independent of the society may as well espouse the unjust views of the major, as the rightful interests of the minor party, and may possibly be turned against both parties. The second method will be exemplified in the federal republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority. In a free government the security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious rights. It consists in the one case in the multiplicity of interests, and in the other in the multiplicity of sects. The degree of security in both cases will depend on the number of interests and sects; and this may be presumed to depend on the extent of country and number of people comprehended under the same government. This view of the subject must particularly recommend a proper federal system to all the sincere and considerate friends of republican government, since it shows that in exact proportion as the territory of the Union may be formed into more circumscribed Confederacies, or States oppressive combinations of a majority will be facilitated: the best security, under the republican forms, for the rights of every class of citizens, will be diminished: and consequently the stability and independence of some member of the government, the only other security, must be proportionately increased. Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradnally induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful. It can be little doubted that if the State of Rhode Island was separated from the Confederacy and left to itself, the insecurity of rights under the popular form of government within such narrow limits would be displayed by such reiterated oppressions of factious majorities that some power altogether independent of the people would soon be called for by the voice of the very factions whose misrule had proved the necessity of it. In the extended republic of the United States, and among the great variety of interests, parties, and sects which it embraces, a coalition of a majority of the whole society could seldom take place on any other principles than those of justice and the general good; whilst there being thus less danger to a minor from the will of a major party, there must be less pretext, also, to provide for the security of the former, by introducing into the government a will not dependent on the latter, or, in other words, a will independent of the society itself. It is no less certain than it is important, notwithstanding the contrary opinions which have been entertained, that the larger the society, provided it lie within a practical sphere, the more duly capable it will be of self-government. And happily for the REPUBLICAN CAUSE, the practicable sphere may be carried to a very great extent, by a judicious modification and mixture of the FEDERAL PRINCIPLE. PUBLIUS.A. Arundhati Roy B. Jhumpa Lahiri C. Salman Rushdie D. Anita Desai ________________________________________ 2. The Lowland was published in: A. 2001 B. 2013 C. 2010 D. 2005 ________________________________________ 3. Which earlier work earned Lahiri the Pulitzer Prize? A. The Namesake B. Unaccustomed Earth C. Interpreter of Maladies D. The Lowland ________________________________________ 4. The novel is primarily about: A. Technology and modernity B. Immigration, family, and political violence C. Business rivalry D. Mythology and folklore ________________________________________ 5. The two central brothers in the novel are: A. Rahul and Anil B. Subhash and Udayan C. Gogol and Ashoke D. Amit and Nikhil ________________________________________ 6. Where did the brothers grow up? A. Mumbai B. Dhaka C. Calcutta D. Delhi ________________________________________ 7. Udayan becomes involved in: A. Peace activism B. Cinema C. Naxalite movement D. Business ________________________________________ 8. Subhash moves to: A. London B. Rhode Island C. Toronto D. Chicago ________________________________________ 9. Udayan is killed in: A. Jail B. A riot C. The lowland near his house D. A car accident ________________________________________ 10. Why does Subhash marry Gauri? A. Love B. To protect her and her unborn child C. Financial benefit D. Family pressure ________________________________________ 11. Gauri eventually: A. Becomes a politician B. Starts a business C. Leaves her family D. Returns to India ________________________________________ 12. Subhash raises Bela: A. With Gauri B. Alone C. With help from his parents D. In India ________________________________________ 13. Bela grows up believing: A. Udayan is her father B. Subhash is her father C. She has no father D. Her father died in war ________________________________________ 14. The setting of political unrest is linked to: A. Partition B. Naxalbari uprising C. Independence movement D. Civil War ________________________________________ 15. The narrative style uses: A. Magical realism B. Non-linear structure C. Poetry D. Second-person narration ________________________________________ 16. Gauri’s character represents: A. Traditional motherhood B. Obedient wife C. Intellectual autonomy and emotional detachment D. Political activism ________________________________________ 17. Bela’s character signifies: A. Rebellion against education B. Second-generation identity struggle C. Complete assimilation D. Materialistic living ________________________________________ 18. Memory in the novel functions as: A. A simple recollection B. A haunting presence affecting identity C. A forgotten history D. A symbolic decoration ________________________________________ 19. The lowland itself symbolizes: A. Wealth B. Stability C. Transitional, unstable space D. Escape ________________________________________ 20. Lahiri’s prose style can be described as: A. Flowery and ornate B. Minimalistic and restrained C. Dramatic and verbose D. Highly poetic ________________________________________ 21. Water imagery reflects: A. Joy and happiness B. Power and victory C. Memory and emotional fluidity D. Evil ________________________________________ 22. Which theory applies strongly to this novel? A. Structuralism B. Postcolonial hybridity C. Absurdism D. Modernism ________________________________________ 23. Postcolonial hybridity is linked to: A. Complete assimilation B. Identity in-between cultures C. Traditional values D. Language fluency alone ________________________________________ 24. Which character best reflects second-generation identity conflict? A. Gauri B. Bela C. Subhash D. Udayan ________________________________________ 25. What does Subhash struggle with most? A. Career failure B. Language C. Guilt and secrecy D. Wealth ________________________________________ 26. Udayan’s ideology centers on: A. Business growth B. Armed communist revolution C. Religious reform D. Education ________________________________________ 27. The novel shows how political violence leads to: A. Personal healing B. Economic prosperity C. Emotional trauma across generations D. Cultural unity ________________________________________ 28. Betrayal appears as: A. Only political B. Only emotional C. Both political and familial D. A background idea ________________________________________ 29. The genre of the text best fits: A. Fantasy B. Realistic political family saga C. Science fiction D. Thriller ________________________________________ 30. The narrative constantly shifts between: A. Dream and reality B. India and America C. Past and future India D. Fiction and nonfiction ________________________________________ 31. Homi Bhabha’s "third space" represents: A. Physical land B. A zone of cultural in-betweenness C. A literal building D. A heavenlike vision ________________________________________ 32. Gauri symbolizes: A. Traditional widowhood B. Female agency vs social expectation C. Blind loyalty D. Economic dependence ________________________________________ 33. Bela unknowingly inherits: A. Udayan’s ideology B. Gauri’s academic passion only C. Subhash’s calmness D. Grandparents’ wealth ________________________________________ 34. Lahiri uses silence to: A. Avoid details B. Deepen psychological complexity C. Reduce story relevance D. Simplify events ________________________________________ 35. A major structural device is: A. Letters B. Non-linear flashbacks C. Mythic storytelling D. Metafiction ________________________________________ 36. Which text offers a migrant theme comparison? A. The God of Small Things B. The White Tiger C. The Namesake D. Train to Pakistan ________________________________________ 38. The Naxalite movement first emerged in: A. Mumbai B. Naxalbari village C. Delhi D. Kerala ________________________________________ 39. Which theme repeats strongly? A. Celebration of success B. Silence and secrets C. Fantasy D. Heroism ________________________________________ 40. What does Bela do as an adult? A. Becomes a doctor B. Engages in environmental activism C. Joins corporate life D. Moves into politics ________________________________________ 41. The immigrant experience in the novel is portrayed as: A. Full belonging B. Alienation and partial belonging C. Achievement D. Liberation ________________________________________ 42. Which idea does Lahiri question through Gauri? A. Heroism B. Maternal expectation C. Religious devotion D. Wealth ________________________________________ 43. Subhash represents: A. Pure rebellion B. Survival and adaptation C. Anti-immigrant sentiment D. Total withdrawal ________________________________________ 44. Lahiri’s writing expects readers to: A. Passively accept the plot B. Read emotional subtext in silences C. Ignore symbols D. Only enjoy the story ________________________________________ 45. The lowland as a metaphor mainly signifies: A. Joy B. Unstable cultural ground C. Triumph D. Isolation from family ________________________________________ 46. Why is The Lowland considered significant? A. Its fantasy themes B. Its deep engagement with politics & identity C. Its humor D. Its romantic style ________________________________________ 47. Which comparative author also writes about diaspora identity? A. Chetan Bhagat B. Amitav Ghosh C. Premchand D. Ruskin Bond ________________________________________ 48. Udayan’s death drives the plot because: A. Family hides it B. It forces new relationships & trauma C. People forget him D. It has no consequence ________________________________________ 49. The narrative ends emphasizing: A. Closure and peace B. Lasting consequences of secrets C. National identity D. Religious conflict ________________________________________ 50. Scholars study this work because it explores: A. Only Indian history B. Trauma, diaspora, gender & politics C. Folk storytelling D. ComedyPartitivePARTITIVE PROPORTIONpartitive articlesPartitive articles in FrenchThe PartitiveThe Partitive Quiz