Quote:
. . . Today we are in a typical moment of transition. No one can say where we are headed. The people of the democratic opposition have the feeling that we won. We taste the sweetness of our victory the same way the Communists, only yesterday our prison guards, taste the bitterness of their defeat. Yet, even as we are conscious of our victory, we feel that we are, in a strange way, losing. In Bulgaria the Communists have won the parliamentary elections and will govern the country, without losing their social legitimacy. In Romania the National Salvation Front, largely dominated by people from the old Communist bureaucracy, has won. In other countries democratic institutions seem shaky, and the political horizon is cloudy. The masquerade goes on: dozens of groups and parties are created, each announces similar slogans, each accuses its adversaries of all possible sins, and each declares itself representative of the national interest. Personal disputes are more important than disputes over values. Arguments over values are fiercer than arguments over ideas.
Quote:
6. By stating “even as we are conscious of our victory, we feel that we are, in a strange way, losing” the author means that
(A) some of the old governments are still unwilling to grant freedom at the individual level.
(B) some of the new governments are not strong enough to exist as a single federation.
(C) some of the new democratic governments are electing to retain the old political parties.
(D) no new parties have been created to fill the vacuum created by the victory of freedom.
(E) some of the new governments are reverting to communism.
warrior1991 wrote:
Ok. Thanks for informing Sajjad Bhai. However, I still contend that OE is not clear. I hope someone will clear my doubt.
warrior1991 - no disrespect to Nova, but I agree with you.
Neither C nor E is supported very well.
I can make a case for and against both with equal strength for each option. Not good.
• Dissecting the questionQuestion 6 asks mostly about the words after "yet."
Yet in this case is a contrast word, a conjunction that means
but nevertheless.
"Yet even as we are conscious of our victory, we feel that we are, in a strange way, losing."-- Who is
we? Go backwards a bit:
The
"people of the democratic opposition [to Communism and communism]
have the feeling that
we won. We taste the sweetness of our
victory . . . "WE = former and current proponents of democracy, people who opposed and oppose Communism
• Beginning to answer why they feel they are losing: textual reviewParaphrasing what follows "yet"
Why do they feel that they are "in a strange way, losing"?
-- To whom? To the communists/Communists.
-- And to anti- and non-democratic forces. To chaos.
(First paragraph: Freedom is not enough.
Democratic institutions need to be built and to endure. The political process is now a mess.)
• Textual analysisWe need to look at what comes after the "Yet" sentence;
that text explains why they feel that they are, "in a strange way, losing."
The
paraphrase above normally would be perfectly usable,
but this question is so frustrating that we need laser-beam analysis
• Bulgaria: Communists, having won a majority democratically, will not lose their social legitimacy.
• In Romania, old-guard Communists with a newly named party "have won"
• other countries: democratic institutions are shaky, political future unclear
• the
masquerade goes on (not very helpful -- [what should be a democratic] political process is not).
-- stable parties vs. too many parties; parties sound alike
-- emotional attacks about the Other Guys, who are Sinners [gee, this is starting to sound familiar] have replaced political discourse; slogans
-- personal disputes (read: vendettas, not respectful disagreement) have become more important than disputes over values
-- arguments over values are fiercer than arguments over ideas.
[This "masquerade" sentence is very abstract. I think it refers back to this phrase: "freedom functioning as an object of
compromise between the major political forces on the scene." Whatever is the case,
normal democratic elements are not present.]
• The answer?Reasonable thought: We need an answer that alludes to or mentions broad anti- or non-democratic forces.
The answer probably includes Communism or the ongoing influence of communism—something along those lines.
The answer may allude to political chaos and descent into what this author thinks are NOT democratic political elements.
There is no such answer.
-- A, B, and D are absurd.
-- None of what we just looked at mentions any of the ideas in those options. We are left with C and E.
• •
C or E? These answers are both pretty bad.(C) some of the new democratic governments are electing to retain the old political parties.• in a way, C fits with Bulgaria and Hungary, but the "old political parties" were totalitarian Communist,
not these ones with new names now present in Bulgaria and Hungary.
• democratic
governments don't elect to retain old political parties.
People who elect the governments do that.
We are allowed to import what we know, at least a little, about democracy.
In a democracy, governments do not "elect to retain" political parties! People do.
•
dozens of groups and parties are created How does this part fit with C? It doesn't.
• These groups are creating a madhouse. But -- it is not at all clear that the madhouse and the groups are
reminiscent of the
old political parties.(E) some of the new governments are reverting to communism.• Closer than C is in one way; option E names
communism.
But this "communism" must be a very loose definition of communism.
• Democratic politics are correctly represented.
The passive voice is effective: governments
are reverting to communism. [because
people are casting votes!]
• we are not given enough info in the passage to decide whether this small-c communism
in its majority equals a government that "has reverted" to communism.
-- In that sense, this answer is problematic.
-- Small-c (as well as big-C) communism is a whole political system,
not just a political party
• true, the governments are not reverting to communism in the sense of
"totalitarian dictatorship" and "very little freedom." (mentioned in first paragraph)
-- How do we assess a parliamentary democracy with a Communist/communist majority?
Can we go a little further and assume that a communist party in majority would institute communism in a loose sense?
• Strategic decisionGo back.
To whom are "they" losing?
The answer is not clear
if we look at the choices.Here is the correct answer, though it is not an option:
members of the democratic opposition fear that they are losing to
forces that will or could destroy new democracy, forces such as
(1) resurrected or refashioned Communists/communists whose parties are winning elections, and
(2) non- or anti-democratic forces in general.
We have to say, "The correct answer is not here. I must decide on a different basis."
Time to get strategic.
Which is worse:
C)
governments that elect to retain old political parties [read: communist parties!]? (Option C should at least say
people who elect . . .)
OR
E) uncertainty about what "reverting to communism" means?
On the GMAT?
I'd pick C.
Based on one word alone:
partiesThey have textual support and are discrete, limited nouns.
Right after the sentence in question, the names of two
two political parties are mentioned. The word "parties" is mentioned again.
In answer E and generally, communism = a whole political system.
The words do not discuss not a whole political system. There is no hint of
a planned economy or totalitarian structures that Communism entailed and
that are described in the first paragraph.
I would not waste any more time on this question.
This particular question is not good.
I don't blame you for feeling frustrated. This question's official explanation is a non-answer.
Hope that helps.
_________________
SC Butler has resumed!Get
two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date,
here.Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life? --
Mary Oliver
close
