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  101
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.
By "the tables have turned" (Line 6-7, Para.2) the author implies that________.
选项 A、the Western leaders have turned self-centered
B、the Asian leaders have become advocates of free trade
C、the developed economies have turned less competitive
D、the developing economies have become more independent
答案C
解析 本题关键词是the tables have turned，问题是作者用“the tables have turned”暗示什么。可定位到第二段。根据第二段前三句，西方国家领导人提倡自由贸易，且他们是最大受益者，而发展中国家则担心经济受损。紧接着提到the tables have turned，然后说欧洲国家虽坚持宣扬自由贸易，却越来越少去实践，而亚洲发展中国家则相反。因此可以得出，the tables have turned指的就是“发达国家竞争力降低”之意，因此选项C与原文属于相同含义，为正确选项。选项A属于主观推导，文章只交代了西方领导人不再像原来那样提倡并实践自由贸易，但不能推出这是“以自我为中心”的表现。根据第二段第六句，现在亚洲国家继续申请特殊保护，却在越来越多地践行着自由贸易(practices more and more free trade)，但这并不等于亚洲领导人成为自由贸易的倡导者 (advocates of free trade)，两者是不同概念，不能简单地等同，因此选项B属于无中生有。选项D虽然符合常识，即发展中国家在过去几十年间日益强大，但文中并未涉及发展中国家独立的问题，所以选项D也属于无中生有。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/MCi4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)