2. 考研
  3. "The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo(禁忌语)." This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy late last mont

"The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo(禁忌语)." This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy late last mont

admin2013-11-29  103
问题     "The word ’protection’ is no longer taboo(禁忌语)." This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy late 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 Western continues to preach free trade, but practices it less and less. Asia, 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 debate. 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 Western theory and practice.
    A little hypocrisy(虚伪)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 author uses "IMF" as an example to illustrate the point that______.
选项 A、European leaders are reluctant to admit they are hypocritical
B、there is an inconsistency between Western theory and practice
C、global institutions are not being led by true globalization advocates
D、European countries’ interests are being ignored by economic leaders
答案C
解析 该事例出现在文章第四段第三句话，显然不在文章开头，也就不是用来引出主题而是为了证明观点，要证明的观点一般都会在前一句表述：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．“真正的问题在于，西方政府继续坚持他们保持着控制国际经济的核心和经济上的机构，与此同时却离国际自由贸易渐行渐远。”由此可以理解该事例在文中要证明的观点是：他们掌控着全球主要金融机构，但是远离全球自由化。因此本题答案为C项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/Uwe4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)