Text 3

　　The provision of positive incentives to work in the new society will not be an easy task. But the most difficult task of all is to devise the ultimate and final sanction to replace the ultimate sanction of hunger—the economic whip of the old dispensation. Moreover, in a society which rightly rejects the pretence of separating economics from politics and denies the autonomy of the economic order, that sanction can be found only in some conscious act of society. We can no longer ask the invisible hand to do our dirty work for us.

　　I confess that I am less horror-struck than some people at the prospect, which seems to me unavoidable, of an ultimate power of what is called direction of labour resting in some arm of society, whether in an organ of state or of trade unions. I should indeed be horrified if I identified this prospect with a return to the conditions of the pre-capitalist era. The economic whip of laissez-faire undoubtedly represented an advance on the serf-like conditions of that period: in that relative sense, the claim of capitalism to have established for the first time a system of “free” labour deserves respect. But the direction of labour as exercised in Great Britain in the Second World War seems to me to represent as great an advance over the economic whip of the heyday of capitalist private enterprise as the economic whip represented over pre-capitalist serfdom.

　　Much depends on the effectiveness of the positive incentives, much, too, on the solidarity and self-discipline of the community. After all, under the system of laissez-faire capitalism the fear of hunger remained an ultimate sanction rather than a continuously operative force. It would have been intolerable if the worker had been normally driven to work by conscious fear of hunger; nor, except in the early and worst days of the Industrial Revolution, did that normally happen. Similarly in the society of the future the power of direction should be regarded not so much as an instrument of daily use but rather as an ultimate sanction held in reserve where voluntary methods fail. It is inconceivable that, in any period or in any conditions that can now be foreseen, any organ of state in Great Britain would be in a position, even if it had the will, to marshal and deploy the labour force over the whole economy by military discipline like an army in the field. This, like other nightmares of a totally planned economy, can be left to those who like to frighten themselves and others with scarecrows.

　　1. The word “sanction”(Line 2, Paragraph 1) is closest in meaning to______.

　　[A] corrective measures [B] encouraging methods

　　[C] preventive efforts [D] revolutionary actions

　　2. Which of the following is implied in the first paragraph?

　　[A] People used to be forced to work under whips.

　　[B] The author dislikes the function of politics in economy.

　　[C] Incentives are always less available than regulations.

　　[D] People have an instinct of working less and getting more.

　　3. The author’s attitudes towards future, as is indicated in the beginning of the second paragraph, is one of______.

　　[A] reluctant acceptance [B] sheer pessimism

　　[C] mild optimism [D] extreme hopefulness

　　4. The author of the text seems to oppose the idea of______.

　　[A] free market [B] military control

　　[C] strict regulations [D] unrestrained labors

　　5. The last sentence of the text indicates the author’s______.

　　[A] hatred [B] affection [C] stubbornness [D] rejection

　　答案

　　1.A 2.B 3.A 4.C 5.D

　　總體分析

　　本文是一篇經(jīng)濟(jì)類文章，介紹了舊的強(qiáng)制性經(jīng)濟(jì)激勵(lì)手段已經(jīng)不適用現(xiàn)代社會(huì)。

　　第一段：指出舊的分配方式中的經(jīng)濟(jì)激勵(lì)手段——饑餓處罰已經(jīng)不能再發(fā)揮作用。

　　第二段：分析指出自由放任資本主義制度下經(jīng)濟(jì)激勵(lì)手段的發(fā)展。

　　第三段：指出在未來社會(huì)中強(qiáng)制性的激勵(lì)手段只能被看作是備用的手段。