Why do you think some scholars find cold war terminology (“first world” and so on) objectionable?

Because the use of that terminology perpetuated the view of certain countries, their peoples and their ways of life as inferior to another, especially those who had better development and better opportunities. It was a terminology that increased the breach between peoples of different origins and cultures, and established a system of inferiority and superiority that was very common during the Cold War era. It also increased the belief that these catgories: First World, Second World and Third World, were immovable and the view was that people from the Third or Second World were below those who were lucky enough to be a part of the more advanced First World.

forty niners migrated west due to gold discovery in california and it the west was a new place for hope this : )

explanation:

this statement is true.

forests are public goods, available for everybody. when usage of such a good becomes interesting for consumers and its usage increases, there can be a risk of overexploitation. it is a non rival good therefore, if one person consumes the good it does not reduce the availability for subsequent consumers.

these caracteristics require the establishment of measures in order to prevent the destruction of a commonly owned space, for example, to restrict the amount of people that have access to the same time.