2. 考研
  3. "The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo". This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy last month, may hav

"The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo". This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy last month, may hav

admin2022-07-29  60
问题     "The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo". This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy last month, may have launched a new era in economic history. Why? For decades, Western leaders have believed that lowering trade barriers and tariffs was a natural good. Doing so, they reasoned, would lead to greater economic efficiency and productivity, which in turn would improve human welfare. Championing free trade thus became a moral, not just an economic cause.
    These leaders, of course, weren’t acting out of unselfishness. They knew their economies were the most competitive, so they’d profit most from liberalization. And developing countries feared that their economies would be swamped by superior Western productivity. Today, however, the tables have turned— though few acknowledge it. The West continues to preach free trade, but practices it less and less. Asian, meanwhile, continues to plead for special protection but practices more and more free trade.
    That’s why Sarkozy’s words were so important: he finally injected some honesty into the trade debates. The truth is that large parts of the West are losing faith in free trade, though few leaders admit it. Some economists are more honest. Paul Krugman is one of the few willing to acknowledge that protectionist arguments are returning. In the short run, there will be winners and losers under free trade. This, of course, is what capitalism is all about. But more and more of these losers will be in the West. Economists in the developed world used to love quoting Joseph Schumpeter, who said that "creative destruction" was an essential part of capitalist growth. But they always assumed that destruction would happen over there. When Western workers began losing jobs, suddenly their leaders began to lose faith in their principles. Things have yet to reverse completely. But there’s clearly a negative trend in a Western theory and practice.
    A little hypocrisy is not in itself a serious problem. The real problem is that Western governments continue to insist that they retain control of the key global economic and financial institutions while drifting away from global liberalization. Look at what’s happening at the IMF (International Monetary Fund). The Europeans have demanded that they keep the post of managing director. But all too often. Western officials put their own interests above everyone else’s when they dominate these global institutions.
    The time has therefore come for the Asians—who are clearly the new winners in today’s global economy—to provide more intellectual leadership in supporting free trade. Sadly, they have yet to do so. Unless Asians speak out, however, there’s a real danger that Adam Smith’s principles, which have brought so much good to the world, could gradually die. And that would leave all of us, worse off, in one way or another.
The Western economies used to like the idea of "creative destruction" because it________.
选项 A、set a long-term rather than short-term goal
B、was an essential part of capitalist development
C、entailed a positive rather than negative mentality
D、was meant to be the destruction of developing economies
答案D
解析 本题关键词是creative destruction，问题是西方经济体曾钟爱“创造性破坏”的原因是什么。可定位到第三段。根据第三段第八句，西方经济学家热衷“创造性破坏”理论，并从中认识到资本增长必然会有代价、造成创造性破坏，下一句即第九句指出，他们认为代价将发生在他处(assumed that destruction would happen over there)，即利益属于自己，损失属于别人(发展中国家)，因此选项D与原文属于相同含义，为正确选项。选项A来自第三段第五句，从短期来看，自由贸易下必然会有赢家和输家，但喜欢这个理论与长短期无关，属于答非所问。选项B是熊彼得(Schumpeter)的观点，但不是西方领导人喜欢引用“创造性破坏”的原因，属于偷换概念。选项C指西方国家背离自由贸易的趋势，这和西方国家热衷“创造性破坏”无关，文中并未提及该理论的积极性或消极性，因此选项C无中生有。第三段：西方国家对自由贸易正在丧失信心。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/gCi4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)