The essence of neoliberalism
时间：2007-05-07 02:44:02
（单词翻译:单击）
As the dominant1 discourse2 would have it, the economic world is a pure and perfect order, implacably unrolling the logic3 of its predictable consequences, and prompt to repress all violations4 by the sanctions that it inflicts5, either automatically or - more unusually - through the intermediary of its armed extensions, the International Monetary6 Fund (IMF) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the policies they impose: reducing labour costs, reducing public expenditures7 and making work more flexible. Is the dominant discourse right? What if, in reality, this economic order were no more than the implementation8 of a utopia - the utopia of neoliberalism - thus converted into a political problem? One that, with the aid of the economic theory that it proclaims, succeeds in conceiving of itself as the scientific description of reality?
This tutelary9 theory is a pure mathematical fiction. From the start it has been founded on a formidable abstraction. For, in the name of a narrow and strict conception of rationality as individual rationality, it brackets the economic and social conditions of rational orientations10 and the economic and social structures that are the condition of their application.
To give the measure of this omission11, it is enough to think just of the educational system. Education is never taken account of as such at a time when it plays a determining role in the production of goods and services as in the production of the producers themselves. From this sort of original sin, inscribed12 in the Walrasian myth (1) of "pure theory", flow all of the deficiencies and faults of the discipline of economics and the fatal obstinacy13 with which it attaches itself to the arbitrary opposition14 which it induces, through its mere15 existence, between a properly economic logic, based on competition and efficiency, and social logic, which is subject to the rule of fairness.
That said, this "theory" that is desocialised and dehistoricised at its roots has, today more than ever, the means of making itself true and empirically verifiable. In effect, neoliberal discourse is not just one discourse among many. Rather, it is a "strong discourse" - the way psychiatric discourse is in an asylum16, in Erving Goffman's analysis (2). It is so strong and so hard to combat only because it has on its side all of the forces of a world of relations of forces, a world that it contributes to making what it is. It does this most notably17 by orienting the economic choices of those who dominate economic relationships. It thus adds its own symbolic18 force to these relations of forces. In the name of this scientific programme, converted into a plan of political action, an immense political project is underway, although its status as such is denied because it appears to be purely19 negative. This project aims to create the conditions under which the "theory" can be realised and can function: a programme of the methodical destruction of collectives.
The movement toward the neoliberal utopia of a pure and perfect market is made possible by the politics of financial deregulation. And it is achieved through the transformative and, it must be said, destructive action of all of the political measures (of which the most recent is the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), designed to protect foreign corporations and their investments from national states) that aim to call into question any and all collective structures that could serve as an obstacle to the logic of the pure market: the nation, whose space to manoeuvre21 continually decreases; work groups, for example through the individualisation of salaries and of careers as a function of individual competences23, with the consequent atomisation of workers; collectives for the defence of the rights of workers, unions, associations, cooperatives; even the family, which loses part of its control over consumption through the constitution of markets by age groups.
The neoliberal programme draws its social power from the political and economic power of those whose interests it expresses: stockholders, financial operators, industrialists24, conservative or social-democratic politicians who have been converted to the reassuring25 layoffs27 of laisser-faire, high-level financial officials eager to impose policies advocating their own extinction28 because, unlike the managers of firms, they run no risk of having eventually to pay the consequences. Neoliberalism tends on the whole to favour severing29 the economy from social realities and thereby30 constructing, in reality, an economic system conforming to its description in pure theory, that is a sort of logical machine that presents itself as a chain of constraints31 regulating economic agents.
The globalisation of financial markets, when joined with the progress of information technology, ensures an unprecedented32 mobility33 of capital. It gives investors34 concerned with the short-term profitability of their investments the possibility of permanently35 comparing the profitability of the largest corporations and, in consequence, penalising these firms' relative setbacks. Subjected to this permanent threat, the corporations themselves have to adjust more and more rapidly to the exigencies36 of the markets, under penalty of "losing the market's confidence", as they say, as well as the support of their stockholders. The latter, anxious to obtain short-term profits, are more and more able to impose their will on managers, using financial directorates to establish the rules under which managers operate and to shape their policies regarding hiring, employment, and wages.
Thus the absolute reign20 of flexibility37 is established, with employees being hiring on fixed38-term contracts or on a temporary basis and repeated corporate39 restructurings and, within the firm itself, competition among autonomous40 divisions as well as among teams forced to perform multiple functions. Finally, this competition is extended to individuals themselves, through the individualisation of the wage relationship: establishment of individual performance objectives, individual performance evaluations42, permanent evaluation41, individual salary increases or granting of bonuses as a function of competence22 and of individual merit; individualised career paths; strategies of "delegating responsibility" tending to ensure the self-exploitation of staff who, simple wage labourers in relations of strong hierarchical dependence43, are at the same time held responsible for their sales, their products, their branch, their store, etc. as though they were independent contractors44. This pressure toward "self-control" extends workers' "involvement" according to the techniques of "participative management" considerably45 beyond management level. All of these are techniques of rational domination that impose over-involvement in work (and not only among management) and work under emergency or high-stress conditions. And they converge46 to weaken or abolish collective standards or solidarities47 (3).
In this way, a Darwinian world emerges - it is the struggle of all against all at all levels of the hierarchy48, which finds support through everyone clinging to their job and organisation49 under conditions of insecurity, suffering, and stress. Without a doubt, the practical establishment of this world of struggle would not succeed so completely without the complicity of all of the precarious50 arrangements that produce insecurity and of the existence of a reserve army of employees rendered docile51 by these social processes that make their situations precarious, as well as by the permanent threat of unemployment. This reserve army exists at all levels of the hierarchy, even at the higher levels, especially among managers. The ultimate foundation of this entire economic order placed under the sign of freedom is in effect the structural52 violence of unemployment, of the insecurity of job tenure53 and the menace of layoff26 that it implies. The condition of the "harmonious54" functioning of the individualist micro-economic model is a mass phenomenon, the existence of a reserve army of the unemployed55.
This structural violence also weighs on what is called the labour contract (wisely rationalised and rendered unreal by the "theory of contracts"). Organisational discourse has never talked as much of trust, co-operation, loyalty56, and organisational culture as in an era when adherence58 to the organisation is obtained at each moment by eliminating all temporal guarantees of employment (three-quarters of hires are for fixed duration, the proportion of temporary employees keeps rising, employment "at will" and the right to fire an individual tend to be freed from any restriction).
Thus we see how the neoliberal utopia tends to embody59 itself in the reality of a kind of infernal machine, whose necessity imposes itself even upon the rulers. Like the Marxism of an earlier time, with which, in this regard, it has much in common, this utopia evokes60 powerful belief - the free trade faith - not only among those who live off it, such as financiers, the owners and managers of large corporations, etc., but also among those, such as high-level government officials and politicians, who derive61 their justification62 for existing from it. For they sanctify the power of markets in the name of economic efficiency, which requires the elimination63 of administrative64 or political barriers capable of inconveniencing the owners of capital in their individual quest for the maximisation of individual profit, which has been turned into a model of rationality. They want independent central banks. And they preach the subordination of nation-states to the requirements of economic freedom for the masters of the economy, with the suppression of any regulation of any market, beginning with the labour market, the prohibition65 of deficits66 and inflation, the general privatisation of public services, and the reduction of public and social expenses.
Economists68 may not necessarily share the economic and social interests of the true believers and may have a variety of individual psychic69 states regarding the economic and social effects of the utopia which they cloak with mathematical reason. Nevertheless, they have enough specific interests in the field of economic science to contribute decisively to the production and reproduction of belief in the neoliberal utopia. Separated from the realities of the economic and social world by their existence and above all by their intellectual formation, which is most frequently purely abstract, bookish, and theoretical, they are particularly inclined to confuse the things of logic with the logic of things.
These economists trust models that they almost never have occasion to submit to the test of experimental verification and are led to look down upon the results of the other historical sciences, in which they do not recognise the purity and crystalline transparency of their mathematical games, whose true necessity and profound complexity70 they are often incapable71 of understanding. They participate and collaborate72 in a formidable economic and social change. Even if some of its consequences horrify73 them (they can join the socialist74 party and give learned counsel to its representatives in the power structure), it cannot displease75 them because, at the risk of a few failures, imputable76 to what they sometimes call "speculative77 bubbles", it tends to give reality to the ultra-logical utopia (ultra-logical like certain forms of insanity) to which they consecrate78 their lives.
And yet the world is there, with the immediately visible effects of the implementation of the great neoliberal utopia: not only the poverty of an increasingly large segment of the most economically advanced societies, the extraordinary growth in income differences, the progressive disappearance79 of autonomous universes of cultural production, such as film, publishing, etc., through the intrusive80 imposition of commercial values, but also and above all two major trends. First is the destruction of all the collective institutions capable of counteracting81 the effects of the infernal machine, primarily those of the state, repository of all of the universal values associated with the idea of the public realm. Second is the imposition everywhere, in the upper spheres of the economy and the state as at the heart of corporations, of that sort of moral Darwinism that, with the cult57 of the winner, schooled in higher mathematics and bungee jumping, institutes the struggle of all against all and cynicism as the norm of all action and behaviour.
Can it be expected that the extraordinary mass of suffering produced by this sort of political-economic regime will one day serve as the starting point of a movement capable of stopping the race to the abyss? Indeed, we are faced here with an extraordinary paradox82. The obstacles encountered on the way to realising the new order of the lone83, but free individual are held today to be imputable to rigidities and vestiges84. All direct and conscious intervention85 of whatever kind, at least when it comes from the state, is discredited86 in advance and thus condemned87 to efface88 itself for the benefit of a pure and anonymous89 mechanism90, the market, whose nature as a site where interests are exercised is forgotten. But in reality, what keeps the social order from dissolving into chaos91, despite the growing volume of the endangered population, is the continuity or survival of those very institutions and representatives of the old order that is in the process of being dismantled92, and all the work of all of the categories of social workers, as well as all the forms of social solidarity93, familial or otherwise.
The transition to "liberalism" takes place in an imperceptible manner, like continental94 drift, thus hiding its effects from view. Its most terrible consequences are those of the long term. These effects themselves are concealed95, paradoxically, by the resistance to which this transition is currently giving rise among those who defend the old order by drawing on the resources it contained, on old solidarities, on reserves of social capital that protect an entire portion of the present social order from falling into anomie. This social capital is fated to wither96 away - although not in the short run - if it is not renewed and reproduced.
But these same forces of "conservation", which it is too easy to treat as conservative, are also, from another point of view, forces of resistance to the establishment of the new order and can become subversive97 forces. If there is still cause for some hope, it is that forces still exist, both in state institutions and in the orientations of social actors (notably individuals and groups most attached to these institutions, those with a tradition of civil and public service) that, under the appearance of simply defending an order that has disappeared and its corresponding "privileges" (which is what they will immediately be accused of), will be able to resist the challenge only by working to invent and construct a new social order. One that will not have as its only law the pursuit of egoistic interests and the individual passion for profit and that will make room for collectives oriented toward the rational pursuit of ends collectively arrived at and collectively ratified98.
How could we not make a special place among these collectives, associations, unions, and parties for the state: the nation-state, or better yet the supranational state - a European state on the way toward a world state - capable of effectively controlling and taxing the profits earned in the financial markets and, above of all, of counteracting the destructive impact that the latter have on the labour market. This could be done with the aid of labour unions by organising the elaboration and defence of the public interest. Like it or not, the public interest will never emerge, even at the cost of a few mathematical errors, from the vision of accountants (in an earlier period one would have said of "shopkeepers") that the new belief system presents as the supreme99 form of human accomplishment100.
(1) Auguste Walras (1800-66), French economist67, author of De la nature de la richesse et de l'origine de la valeur ("On the Nature of Wealth and on the Origin of Value") (1848). He was one of the first to attempt to apply mathematics to economic inquiry101.
(2) Erving Goffman. 1961. Asylums102: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates103. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
(3) See the two journal issues devoted104 to "Nouvelles formes de domination dans le travail105" ("New forms of domination in work"), Actes de la recherche106 en sciences sociales, nos. 114, September 1996, and 115, December 1996, especially the introduction by Gabrielle Balazs and Michel Pialoux, "Crise du travail et crise du politique" [Work crisis and political crisis], no. 114: p.3-4.
This tutelary9 theory is a pure mathematical fiction. From the start it has been founded on a formidable abstraction. For, in the name of a narrow and strict conception of rationality as individual rationality, it brackets the economic and social conditions of rational orientations10 and the economic and social structures that are the condition of their application.
To give the measure of this omission11, it is enough to think just of the educational system. Education is never taken account of as such at a time when it plays a determining role in the production of goods and services as in the production of the producers themselves. From this sort of original sin, inscribed12 in the Walrasian myth (1) of "pure theory", flow all of the deficiencies and faults of the discipline of economics and the fatal obstinacy13 with which it attaches itself to the arbitrary opposition14 which it induces, through its mere15 existence, between a properly economic logic, based on competition and efficiency, and social logic, which is subject to the rule of fairness.
That said, this "theory" that is desocialised and dehistoricised at its roots has, today more than ever, the means of making itself true and empirically verifiable. In effect, neoliberal discourse is not just one discourse among many. Rather, it is a "strong discourse" - the way psychiatric discourse is in an asylum16, in Erving Goffman's analysis (2). It is so strong and so hard to combat only because it has on its side all of the forces of a world of relations of forces, a world that it contributes to making what it is. It does this most notably17 by orienting the economic choices of those who dominate economic relationships. It thus adds its own symbolic18 force to these relations of forces. In the name of this scientific programme, converted into a plan of political action, an immense political project is underway, although its status as such is denied because it appears to be purely19 negative. This project aims to create the conditions under which the "theory" can be realised and can function: a programme of the methodical destruction of collectives.
The movement toward the neoliberal utopia of a pure and perfect market is made possible by the politics of financial deregulation. And it is achieved through the transformative and, it must be said, destructive action of all of the political measures (of which the most recent is the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), designed to protect foreign corporations and their investments from national states) that aim to call into question any and all collective structures that could serve as an obstacle to the logic of the pure market: the nation, whose space to manoeuvre21 continually decreases; work groups, for example through the individualisation of salaries and of careers as a function of individual competences23, with the consequent atomisation of workers; collectives for the defence of the rights of workers, unions, associations, cooperatives; even the family, which loses part of its control over consumption through the constitution of markets by age groups.
The neoliberal programme draws its social power from the political and economic power of those whose interests it expresses: stockholders, financial operators, industrialists24, conservative or social-democratic politicians who have been converted to the reassuring25 layoffs27 of laisser-faire, high-level financial officials eager to impose policies advocating their own extinction28 because, unlike the managers of firms, they run no risk of having eventually to pay the consequences. Neoliberalism tends on the whole to favour severing29 the economy from social realities and thereby30 constructing, in reality, an economic system conforming to its description in pure theory, that is a sort of logical machine that presents itself as a chain of constraints31 regulating economic agents.
The globalisation of financial markets, when joined with the progress of information technology, ensures an unprecedented32 mobility33 of capital. It gives investors34 concerned with the short-term profitability of their investments the possibility of permanently35 comparing the profitability of the largest corporations and, in consequence, penalising these firms' relative setbacks. Subjected to this permanent threat, the corporations themselves have to adjust more and more rapidly to the exigencies36 of the markets, under penalty of "losing the market's confidence", as they say, as well as the support of their stockholders. The latter, anxious to obtain short-term profits, are more and more able to impose their will on managers, using financial directorates to establish the rules under which managers operate and to shape their policies regarding hiring, employment, and wages.
Thus the absolute reign20 of flexibility37 is established, with employees being hiring on fixed38-term contracts or on a temporary basis and repeated corporate39 restructurings and, within the firm itself, competition among autonomous40 divisions as well as among teams forced to perform multiple functions. Finally, this competition is extended to individuals themselves, through the individualisation of the wage relationship: establishment of individual performance objectives, individual performance evaluations42, permanent evaluation41, individual salary increases or granting of bonuses as a function of competence22 and of individual merit; individualised career paths; strategies of "delegating responsibility" tending to ensure the self-exploitation of staff who, simple wage labourers in relations of strong hierarchical dependence43, are at the same time held responsible for their sales, their products, their branch, their store, etc. as though they were independent contractors44. This pressure toward "self-control" extends workers' "involvement" according to the techniques of "participative management" considerably45 beyond management level. All of these are techniques of rational domination that impose over-involvement in work (and not only among management) and work under emergency or high-stress conditions. And they converge46 to weaken or abolish collective standards or solidarities47 (3).
In this way, a Darwinian world emerges - it is the struggle of all against all at all levels of the hierarchy48, which finds support through everyone clinging to their job and organisation49 under conditions of insecurity, suffering, and stress. Without a doubt, the practical establishment of this world of struggle would not succeed so completely without the complicity of all of the precarious50 arrangements that produce insecurity and of the existence of a reserve army of employees rendered docile51 by these social processes that make their situations precarious, as well as by the permanent threat of unemployment. This reserve army exists at all levels of the hierarchy, even at the higher levels, especially among managers. The ultimate foundation of this entire economic order placed under the sign of freedom is in effect the structural52 violence of unemployment, of the insecurity of job tenure53 and the menace of layoff26 that it implies. The condition of the "harmonious54" functioning of the individualist micro-economic model is a mass phenomenon, the existence of a reserve army of the unemployed55.
This structural violence also weighs on what is called the labour contract (wisely rationalised and rendered unreal by the "theory of contracts"). Organisational discourse has never talked as much of trust, co-operation, loyalty56, and organisational culture as in an era when adherence58 to the organisation is obtained at each moment by eliminating all temporal guarantees of employment (three-quarters of hires are for fixed duration, the proportion of temporary employees keeps rising, employment "at will" and the right to fire an individual tend to be freed from any restriction).
Thus we see how the neoliberal utopia tends to embody59 itself in the reality of a kind of infernal machine, whose necessity imposes itself even upon the rulers. Like the Marxism of an earlier time, with which, in this regard, it has much in common, this utopia evokes60 powerful belief - the free trade faith - not only among those who live off it, such as financiers, the owners and managers of large corporations, etc., but also among those, such as high-level government officials and politicians, who derive61 their justification62 for existing from it. For they sanctify the power of markets in the name of economic efficiency, which requires the elimination63 of administrative64 or political barriers capable of inconveniencing the owners of capital in their individual quest for the maximisation of individual profit, which has been turned into a model of rationality. They want independent central banks. And they preach the subordination of nation-states to the requirements of economic freedom for the masters of the economy, with the suppression of any regulation of any market, beginning with the labour market, the prohibition65 of deficits66 and inflation, the general privatisation of public services, and the reduction of public and social expenses.
Economists68 may not necessarily share the economic and social interests of the true believers and may have a variety of individual psychic69 states regarding the economic and social effects of the utopia which they cloak with mathematical reason. Nevertheless, they have enough specific interests in the field of economic science to contribute decisively to the production and reproduction of belief in the neoliberal utopia. Separated from the realities of the economic and social world by their existence and above all by their intellectual formation, which is most frequently purely abstract, bookish, and theoretical, they are particularly inclined to confuse the things of logic with the logic of things.
These economists trust models that they almost never have occasion to submit to the test of experimental verification and are led to look down upon the results of the other historical sciences, in which they do not recognise the purity and crystalline transparency of their mathematical games, whose true necessity and profound complexity70 they are often incapable71 of understanding. They participate and collaborate72 in a formidable economic and social change. Even if some of its consequences horrify73 them (they can join the socialist74 party and give learned counsel to its representatives in the power structure), it cannot displease75 them because, at the risk of a few failures, imputable76 to what they sometimes call "speculative77 bubbles", it tends to give reality to the ultra-logical utopia (ultra-logical like certain forms of insanity) to which they consecrate78 their lives.
And yet the world is there, with the immediately visible effects of the implementation of the great neoliberal utopia: not only the poverty of an increasingly large segment of the most economically advanced societies, the extraordinary growth in income differences, the progressive disappearance79 of autonomous universes of cultural production, such as film, publishing, etc., through the intrusive80 imposition of commercial values, but also and above all two major trends. First is the destruction of all the collective institutions capable of counteracting81 the effects of the infernal machine, primarily those of the state, repository of all of the universal values associated with the idea of the public realm. Second is the imposition everywhere, in the upper spheres of the economy and the state as at the heart of corporations, of that sort of moral Darwinism that, with the cult57 of the winner, schooled in higher mathematics and bungee jumping, institutes the struggle of all against all and cynicism as the norm of all action and behaviour.
Can it be expected that the extraordinary mass of suffering produced by this sort of political-economic regime will one day serve as the starting point of a movement capable of stopping the race to the abyss? Indeed, we are faced here with an extraordinary paradox82. The obstacles encountered on the way to realising the new order of the lone83, but free individual are held today to be imputable to rigidities and vestiges84. All direct and conscious intervention85 of whatever kind, at least when it comes from the state, is discredited86 in advance and thus condemned87 to efface88 itself for the benefit of a pure and anonymous89 mechanism90, the market, whose nature as a site where interests are exercised is forgotten. But in reality, what keeps the social order from dissolving into chaos91, despite the growing volume of the endangered population, is the continuity or survival of those very institutions and representatives of the old order that is in the process of being dismantled92, and all the work of all of the categories of social workers, as well as all the forms of social solidarity93, familial or otherwise.
The transition to "liberalism" takes place in an imperceptible manner, like continental94 drift, thus hiding its effects from view. Its most terrible consequences are those of the long term. These effects themselves are concealed95, paradoxically, by the resistance to which this transition is currently giving rise among those who defend the old order by drawing on the resources it contained, on old solidarities, on reserves of social capital that protect an entire portion of the present social order from falling into anomie. This social capital is fated to wither96 away - although not in the short run - if it is not renewed and reproduced.
But these same forces of "conservation", which it is too easy to treat as conservative, are also, from another point of view, forces of resistance to the establishment of the new order and can become subversive97 forces. If there is still cause for some hope, it is that forces still exist, both in state institutions and in the orientations of social actors (notably individuals and groups most attached to these institutions, those with a tradition of civil and public service) that, under the appearance of simply defending an order that has disappeared and its corresponding "privileges" (which is what they will immediately be accused of), will be able to resist the challenge only by working to invent and construct a new social order. One that will not have as its only law the pursuit of egoistic interests and the individual passion for profit and that will make room for collectives oriented toward the rational pursuit of ends collectively arrived at and collectively ratified98.
How could we not make a special place among these collectives, associations, unions, and parties for the state: the nation-state, or better yet the supranational state - a European state on the way toward a world state - capable of effectively controlling and taxing the profits earned in the financial markets and, above of all, of counteracting the destructive impact that the latter have on the labour market. This could be done with the aid of labour unions by organising the elaboration and defence of the public interest. Like it or not, the public interest will never emerge, even at the cost of a few mathematical errors, from the vision of accountants (in an earlier period one would have said of "shopkeepers") that the new belief system presents as the supreme99 form of human accomplishment100.
(1) Auguste Walras (1800-66), French economist67, author of De la nature de la richesse et de l'origine de la valeur ("On the Nature of Wealth and on the Origin of Value") (1848). He was one of the first to attempt to apply mathematics to economic inquiry101.
(2) Erving Goffman. 1961. Asylums102: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates103. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
(3) See the two journal issues devoted104 to "Nouvelles formes de domination dans le travail105" ("New forms of domination in work"), Actes de la recherche106 en sciences sociales, nos. 114, September 1996, and 115, December 1996, especially the introduction by Gabrielle Balazs and Michel Pialoux, "Crise du travail et crise du politique" [Work crisis and political crisis], no. 114: p.3-4.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
dominant
|
|
| adj.支配的，统治的；占优势的；显性的；n.主因，要素，主要的人(或物)；显性基因 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
discourse
|
|
| n.论文，演说；谈话；话语；vi.讲述，著述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
logic
|
|
| n.逻辑(学)；逻辑性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
violations
|
|
| 违反( violation的名词复数 )； 冒犯； 违反（行为、事例）； 强奸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
inflicts
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
monetary
|
|
| adj.货币的，钱的；通货的；金融的；财政的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
expenditures
|
|
| n.花费( expenditure的名词复数 )；使用；（尤指金钱的）支出额；（精力、时间、材料等的）耗费 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
implementation
|
|
| n.实施，贯彻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
tutelary
|
|
| adj.保护的；守护的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
orientations
|
|
| n.方向( orientation的名词复数 )；定位；（任职等前的）培训；环境判定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
omission
|
|
| n.省略，删节；遗漏或省略的事物，冗长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
inscribed
|
|
| v.写，刻( inscribe的过去式和过去分词 )；内接 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
obstinacy
|
|
| n.顽固；（病痛等）难治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
asylum
|
|
| n.避难所，庇护所，避难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
notably
|
|
| adv.值得注意地，显著地，尤其地，特别地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
symbolic
|
|
| adj.象征性的，符号的，象征主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
manoeuvre
|
|
| n.策略，调动；v.用策略，调动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
competence
|
|
| n.能力，胜任，称职 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
competences
|
|
| 能力（competence的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
industrialists
|
|
| n.工业家，实业家( industrialist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
reassuring
|
|
| a.使人消除恐惧和疑虑的，使人放心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
layoff
|
|
| n.临时解雇，操作停止，活动停止期间，失业期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
layoffs
|
|
| 临时解雇( layoff的名词复数 )； 停工，停止活动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
extinction
|
|
| n.熄灭，消亡，消灭，灭绝，绝种 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
severing
|
|
| v.切断，断绝( sever的现在分词 )；断，裂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
constraints
|
|
| 强制( constraint的名词复数 )； 限制； 约束 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
unprecedented
|
|
| adj.无前例的，新奇的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
mobility
|
|
| n.可动性，变动性，情感不定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
investors
|
|
| n.投资者，出资者( investor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
permanently
|
|
| adv.永恒地，永久地，固定不变地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
exigencies
|
|
| n.急切需要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
flexibility
|
|
| n.柔韧性，弹性，（光的）折射性，灵活性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
corporate
|
|
| adj.共同的，全体的；公司的，企业的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
autonomous
|
|
| adj.自治的；独立的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
evaluation
|
|
| n.估价，评价；赋值 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
evaluations
|
|
| 估价( evaluation的名词复数 )； 赋值； 估计价值； [医学]诊断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
dependence
|
|
| n.依靠，依赖；信任，信赖；隶属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
contractors
|
|
| n.（建筑、监造中的）承包人( contractor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
converge
|
|
| vi.会合；聚集，集中；(思想、观点等)趋近 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
solidarities
|
|
| 团结( solidarity的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
48
hierarchy
|
|
| n.等级制度；统治集团，领导层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
precarious
|
|
| adj.不安定的，靠不住的；根据不足的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
docile
|
|
| adj.驯服的，易控制的，容易教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
structural
|
|
| adj.构造的，组织的，建筑（用）的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
tenure
|
|
| n.终身职位；任期；(土地)保有权，保有期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
harmonious
|
|
| adj.和睦的，调和的，和谐的，协调的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
unemployed
|
|
| adj.失业的，没有工作的；未动用的，闲置的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
adherence
|
|
| n.信奉，依附，坚持，固着 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
embody
|
|
| vt.具体表达，使具体化；包含，收录 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
evokes
|
|
| 产生，引起，唤起( evoke的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
derive
|
|
| v.取得；导出；引申；来自；源自；出自 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
justification
|
|
| n.正当的理由；辩解的理由 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
elimination
|
|
| n.排除，消除，消灭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
administrative
|
|
| adj.行政的，管理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
prohibition
|
|
| n.禁止；禁令，禁律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
deficits
|
|
| n.不足额( deficit的名词复数 )；赤字；亏空；亏损 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
economist
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家，节俭的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
economists
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家( economist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
psychic
|
|
| n.对超自然力敏感的人；adj.有超自然力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
complexity
|
|
| n.复杂(性)，复杂的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
collaborate
|
|
| vi.协作，合作；协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
horrify
|
|
| vt.使恐怖，使恐惧，使惊骇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
socialist
|
|
| n.社会主义者；adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
displease
|
|
| vt.使不高兴，惹怒；n.不悦，不满，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
imputable
|
|
| adj.可归罪的，可归咎的，可归因的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
speculative
|
|
| adj.思索性的，暝想性的，推理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
consecrate
|
|
| v.使圣化，奉…为神圣；尊崇；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
disappearance
|
|
| n.消失，消散，失踪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
intrusive
|
|
| adj.打搅的；侵扰的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
counteracting
|
|
| 对抗，抵消( counteract的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
paradox
|
|
| n.似乎矛盾却正确的说法；自相矛盾的人(物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
lone
|
|
| adj.孤寂的，单独的；唯一的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
vestiges
|
|
| 残余部分( vestige的名词复数 )； 遗迹； 痕迹； 毫不 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
discredited
|
|
| 不足信的，不名誉的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
efface
|
|
| v.擦掉，抹去 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
anonymous
|
|
| adj.无名的；匿名的；无特色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
mechanism
|
|
| n.机械装置；机构，结构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
chaos
|
|
| n.混乱，无秩序 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
dismantled
|
|
| 拆开( dismantle的过去式和过去分词 )； 拆卸； 废除； 取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
solidarity
|
|
| n.团结；休戚相关 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
continental
|
|
| adj.大陆的，大陆性的，欧洲大陆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
wither
|
|
| vt.使凋谢，使衰退，(用眼神气势等)使畏缩；vi.枯萎，衰退，消亡 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
subversive
|
|
| adj.颠覆性的，破坏性的；n.破坏份子，危险份子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
ratified
|
|
| v.批准，签认（合约等）( ratify的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
accomplishment
|
|
| n.完成，成就，（pl.）造诣，技能 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
asylums
|
|
| n.避难所( asylum的名词复数 )；庇护；政治避难；精神病院 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
inmates
|
|
| n.囚犯( inmate的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
travail
|
|
| n.阵痛；努力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
recherche
|
|
| adj.精选的；罕有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
©2005-2010英文阅读网