Why did the communist ban confucianism in 1949?

Why does c. wright mills identify critical thinking as one of the most important criteria for the development of intellectual craftsmanship? why is constantly being aware of the biased nature of your reactions and interactions (what c. wright mills calls self-reflexive) key to the development of that critical thinking? finally, why is keeping a file important, how can it lean to intellectual curiosity which can foster critical thinking and to develop a keen analytical mind?

What policy did "jim crow" laws put in place? black codes integration segregation 2. the supreme court case that established the doctrine of "separate but equal" was dred scott v. sandford plessy v. ferguson brown v. board of education 3. the supreme court case that overturned the doctrine of "separate but equal" wasdred scott v. sandford plessy v. ferguson brown v. board of education

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.