Bunuel wrote:
Politician: Although our country has traditionally benefited greatly from trade with our chief trading partner, we need to cease any and all trade with this trading partner immediately, due to its clear and egregious human rights violations. Reports indicate that our long-time trading partner has been engaging in practices that our country considers utterly insupportable and that the United Nations has frequently condemned. As a nation, we have always stood for clear human rights standards, and we cannot risk practicing a double standard. We must instead set the standard and encourage respect for human rights around the world.
The argument made by the politician depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Ending trade with the chief trading partner will help put a stop to the trading partner’s current human rights violations.
(B) The human rights violations are closely connected to the specific products traded between the countries.
(C) The need to stand by a standard of human rights is of greater value than the trading loss that will occur by ending trade.
(D) The politician is currently head of a committee that is responsible for keeping track of human rights violations among trading partners.
(E) This country will end trade with the chief trading partner in order to encourage other nations to do the same.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
Overview: In this question, a politician argues for ending trade with a major trading partner on the grounds that the trading partner engages in serious human rights violations. The politician notes that her country has always set a clear standard on the issue of human rights and that the only consistent path to take is one of ending trade with the trading partner. The question then asks for the answer choice that best expresses the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends. To select the correct answer, the student first needs to identify the politician’s primary claim: that despite the financial benefits of trade, the politician’s country must end trade with a partner that is committing human rights violations, because the politician’s country opposes any kind of human rights violations. It is important to note that the human rights violations are coming from a chief trading partner, so ending trade with that partner could create a void in the economy of the politician’s country. Because the politician does not address this void, it is safe to assume that she believes the economic void will not compare with the moral void that would follow continued trade with the trading partner. The correct answer choice will reflect this assumption.
The Correct Answer:C Answer choice (C) best expresses the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends: the importance of holding up the standard of human rights is more important than the economic loss that would occur from ending trade with the trading partner. Therefore, answer choice (C) is correct.
The Incorrect Answers:A The politician might very well hope that ending trade with the major trading partner will lead to an end in the human rights violations. She does mention that her country should “set the standard and encourage respect for human rights around the world.” But this does not in itself suggest that the assumption for her conclusion is based on an expected end to human rights violations. The politician’s statement indicates instead that she believes her country should be willing to end trade with the trading partner because it is the right thing to do and because her country “cannot risk practicing a double standard.” It might be that the trading partner will end its human rights violations in order to resume trade with the politician’s country. But nothing in the passage suggests that this is the primary assumption on which the politician’s argument depends, so answer choice (A) is incorrect.
B The products currently being traded might very well be closely connected to the human rights violations, but there is nothing in the politician’s statement that implies this. Answer choice (B) is incorrect due to insufficient information to support the assumption.
D The nature of the politician’s responsibilities might contribute to her information about the trading partner that is committing human rights violations. But her responsibilities do not, in and of themselves, contribute to the assumption on which her argument depends. If anything, the politician is simply doing her job. Answer choice (D) is incorrect, because it is not immediately relevant to the assumption of the argument.
E Answer choice (E) describes more of a result rather than a cause; that is to say, it indicates a desired effect of ending trade with the trading partner but does not necessarily indicate the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends. The politician notes, “We must instead set the standard and encourage respect for human rights around the world.” So, she is encouraging her country to set an international standard that should be adopted internationally. But again, this is not the assumption on which her argument depends. Answer choice (E) is incorrect.