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  98
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.
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 本题关键词是protection，属于词义题，定位到第一段。根据第一段第一和第二句，“protection”一词不再是禁忌语，法国总统的这句话开启了经济史的新时代。后面开始介绍在此之前的数十年(For decades)西方领导人所持有的观点，他们认为减少贸易壁垒、降低关税(lowering trade barriers and tariffs)就是好事，所以A protection一词指的是和贸易自由相反的观点，即提高贸易壁垒、增加关税的做法，选项D与原文属于相同含义，为正确选项。根据第一段第五句，西方领导人认为减少贸易壁垒、降低关税可以提升经济效率和生产力，所以提高经济效率是减少贸易壁垒和降低关税的结果，与protection无直接关联，更不是protection本身，所以选项A曲解文意。选项B过于绝对，因为protection并不意味着完全结束自由贸易活动。根据第一段第六句，数十年来捍卫自由贸易已不仅仅是经济行为，更成了一项道德事业 (moral cause)，但从这句并不能推出实施保护(protection)就是降低道德标准，因此选项C属于主观推导。第一段：数十年来，西方国家曾坚定捍卫自由贸易。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/cCi4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)