2. 考研
  3. On the face of it, anarchists, who believe in no government, have little in common with Jihadists, who believe in imposing a par

On the face of it, anarchists, who believe in no government, have little in common with Jihadists, who believe in imposing a par

admin2009-04-27  48
问题     On the face of it, anarchists, who believe in no government, have little in common with Jihadists, who believe in imposing a particularly rigid form of government on every one. The theoreticians for both movements have often been bearded and angry, of course, and their followers have readily taken to the bomb. But there the similarities end, don’t they, so what lessons can be drawn from a bunch of zealots who flourished over 100 years ago and whose ideology now counts for practically nothing?
    At least two, actually. The first is that repression, expulsion and restrictions on free speech do little to end terrorism. All were tried, often with great vigour, at the end of the 19th century when the anarchist violence that terrified much of Europe and parts of America was at its zenith. As our report makes clear, governments had good reason to respond. Austria, France, Italy, Spain and the United States all lost an empress, king, president or prime minister to anarchist assassins. Such murders were so common that King Umber to of Italy, throwing himself aside to escape a stabbing, casually remarked, "These are the risks of the job." (He was later shot dead.) Anarchists also killed lots of less exalted innocents.
    Then, as now, governments responded to the clamour for action with measures to criminalise anyone preaching or condoning violence and, if they were foreign, to keep them out of the country. Spain brought in courts-martial for bombers, foreshadowing per haps America’s military commissions for Guantanamo trials. Britain, with a tradition of tolerating dissent, became home to many continental radicals, such as those driven out of Germany after the two attempts on Kaiser Wilhelm I’s life in 1878. Britain, however, was not afflicted with bombings as other countries were. Spain, where every kind of retribution including the crudest of tortures was the standard response, suffered many more outrages. Yet few lessons seem to have been learnt. Several of the new measures announced on August 5th by Tony Blair, Britain’s prime minister, echo almost exactly those passed in France after a bomb had been lobbed into the French parliament in 1893.
    In both Britain and America, new attacks are said to be inevitable. Yet every new attack is followed by new measures, as though such measures could have averted an inevitability had they been in place before. They could not, both logically and because terror ism cannot be defeated, as countries can be. That is the second lesson to be drawn from the anarchists.
选项 A、to end terrorism is to end free speech.
B、Licence in speech may breed peaceful environment.
C、the base camp of anarchist violence is located in US.
D、people from all walks of life are the targets of anarchists.
答案B
解析 本题是一道细节题，其答案信息在第二段的第二句，本句的大意是："第一个教训是…对于自由言论的压抑、排斥和限制无助于消除恐怖主义"。由此可以反推出本题的正确答案，言论自由也许会产生和平的环境。在解题时应注意理解中心主旨内容，更要时刻注意逆向思维的运用。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/3Ha4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)