Read the following
paragraph and match the highlighted words with the meaning given in the
following table.
President Obama's concern about the Indian
economy - touching, no doubt - is quite unnecessary. Are there a number of
problems besetting the Indian economy at the moment? Yes; only the most naively optimistic or pig-headedly jingoistic would believe otherwise. And
admittedly, these problems have international ramifications. With the
globalised nature of trade and capital flows nowadays and the size and heft of
the Indian economy, it could scarcely be otherwise. But at the end of the day,
the maladies plaguing the Indian
economy are peculiarly Indian in nature, situated in the context of Indian
coalition politics and with Indian solutions. Foreign problem-solvers with
their laughably reductive solutions
need not apply.
Obama paid lip service to the concept of Indian interests being paramount by stating that it was not the place of the US to tell India how to chart its economic future. But he followed it up by doing precisely that. When Obama presents the opening of various sectors of the Indian economy for foreign investment as the panacea for its woes, you can be sure that he's thinking of US interests, not Indian. With the American economy in dire straits, it would suit American investors just fine to be able to park their capital in relatively safe Indian assets. Whether that level of exposure to American capital is the best thing for the Indian economy at the moment is beside the point, of course.
What makes the hypocrisy truly blatant is the rhetoric Obama is churning out for domestic consumption in the US in the lead-up to the elections there. Time and again, he has criticised the practice of outsourcing; time and again, he raised the bogey of Indians stealing American jobs. Opening up the economy, it seems, is fine as long as it's a one-sided affair. But allowing Indians a stake in the American economy? Perish the thought.
Obama paid lip service to the concept of Indian interests being paramount by stating that it was not the place of the US to tell India how to chart its economic future. But he followed it up by doing precisely that. When Obama presents the opening of various sectors of the Indian economy for foreign investment as the panacea for its woes, you can be sure that he's thinking of US interests, not Indian. With the American economy in dire straits, it would suit American investors just fine to be able to park their capital in relatively safe Indian assets. Whether that level of exposure to American capital is the best thing for the Indian economy at the moment is beside the point, of course.
What makes the hypocrisy truly blatant is the rhetoric Obama is churning out for domestic consumption in the US in the lead-up to the elections there. Time and again, he has criticised the practice of outsourcing; time and again, he raised the bogey of Indians stealing American jobs. Opening up the economy, it seems, is fine as long as it's a one-sided affair. But allowing Indians a stake in the American economy? Perish the thought.
|
|
Word
|
|
Meaning
|
|
A
|
naive
|
1
|
A
disease, a disorder, or an ailment
|
|
B
|
jingoistic
|
2
|
characterized
by or causing diminution or curtailment
|
|
C
|
malady
|
3
|
The
practice of claiming beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or
possess
|
|
D
|
reductive
|
4
|
Lacking
worldly experience and understanding
|
|
E
|
panacea
|
5
|
Excessively
patriotic
|
|
F
|
hypocrisy
|
6
|
the art
of using speech to persuade, influence, or please
|
|
G
|
rhetoric
|
7
|
A
remedy for all diseases, evils, or difficulties
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.