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  144
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.
It can be inferred that "protection"(Line 1, Para. 1)means______.
选项 A、improving economic efficiency
B、ending the free-trade practice
C、lowering moral standard
D、raising trade tariffs
答案D
解析 该词出现在文章第一句The word“protection”is no longer taboo．“protection不再是禁语了”。读完本句就可以想到protection过去曾经是禁忌，再借助下旬：This short sentence may have launched a new era in economic history“这句话也许已经开启了经济史的新时期”，至此似乎还不能推断出protection究竟什么含义。于是再借助下句：For decades，Western leaders have believed that lowering trade barriers and tariffs was a natural good“过去几十年里，西方领导人一直相信降低贸易壁垒，降低关税是自然而然的好事”。现在就可以发现以下逻辑关系：过去不提protection，过去西方领导人想降低关税，降低贸易壁垒；现在可以protection(：不再是禁忌)，那么protection便意味着提高关税，提高贸易壁垒。由此我们可以确定本题答案为D项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/Wwe4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)