Should roosevelt be given the task of “ improving” parts of the world even if they do not want to be improved?

No

Explanation:

First of all, who would be the one giving the task?

Second of all, the people must be able to accept change for them to experience change.

Third of all, who would take on the task? Which country/people? Who would provide the resources, fundings, & volunteers to help "improve" the world.

Fourth, what kind of improvements are we talking about? Is it really beneficial, or does it just help with foreign government agendas?

Fifth, would there be any "extra's" that those parts of the world have to take on? Would they be called upon later on to help even when they cannot? Help usually have strings attached, and they would force obligation on the beneficiary to return the favor at a later time.

Of course, if the parts of the world wants to be improved, and there is the resources and funds to do so, then yes, Roosevelt is right in "improving" those parts of the world.

~

i do believe its (d) it allowed the government to offer pioneers sixty acres of western land if they lived on it and made improvements to it.

explanation: signed into law in may 1862, the homestead act opened up settlement in the western united states, allowing any american, including freed slaves, to put in a claim for up to 160 free acres of federal land. by the end of the civil war, 15,000 homestead claims had been established, and more followed in the postwar years