For all their significant differences, these philosophers had one thin

Question

For all their significant differences, these philosophers had one thing in common: they believed that modern political thinking must be based on reason, on a rational analysis of human nature and of the conditions necessary for freedom and justice, in states maintained by the consent of the governed. Hence, they would almost all share a certain despair and wonder at the extent to which modern politics has in some places been dominated by irrationality, by, for example, the success of charismatic tyrants who justify their activities by the cult of personality or by racial-ethnic-nationalistic metaphors or by a return to theocracy, the rule of the clerisy in the name of a traditional religion.

Dealing with such states creates real problems for Liberals and Communists alike, because they rest on principles foreign to the entire modern Western tradition and hence are often frustratingly incomprehensible to Westerners. Its very hard for us to accept that some people may not want democracy, do not place a particularly high value on personal liberty to do as they wish, and are not concerned about the consent of the governed or citizens' rights in the way that our models of the state require.

In the West, the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order is very much alive and in the ascendant, as the hard-won adjustments to that brought about by a socialism inspired by Marx are, bit by bit, being shredded by the need to keep capitalism dynamic and by the growing power of giant corporations. At the same time, however, the threats posed by terrorism are leading many Western governments to introduce significant limitations on personal liberty in the name of national security.

It's also clear that the political and economic success of Western liberalism is helping to increase the already alarming gap between rich and poor throughout the world, in precisely the way Marx predicted. There is no shortage of dire warnings about the urgent need to address this issue with something more than World Trade Organization meetings and World Bank loans. But any intelligent and effective steps for more global justice may well require a significant re-evaluation of the very principles on which the success of that liberalism depends.   1 
 1. Which of the following most accurately describes the meaning of the first sentence of paragraph three?

A. Modern corporations are threatening the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order. 
B. Marxist socialism is successfully adjusting to the threat of capitalism.
C. The threats posed by terrorism have resulted in limitations on personal liberty in many Western governments. 
D. Capitalism made concessions to Marxist socialism that are now being undone. 
E. The West won its battle to stem the spread of socialism in the East.

Nikhil · Answer

+1 kudos to the posts containing answer explanations of all questions

sshugart · Answer

This is my first RC explanation, so forgive any errors. IR/Polisci grad here, so my moment to finally be helpful. The first sentence of the third paragraph touches on several points, to break it down in parts:
 In the West, the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order is very much alive and in the ascendant  -> This means in the west we are still under the Hobbes-Locke political order 
 as the hard-won adjustments to that brought about by a socialism inspired by Marx are  -> Marxism brought about adjustments to the capitalist system such as unions, worker rights, health care, etc 
 bit by bit, being shredded by the need to keep capitalism dynamic and by the growing power of giant corporations  -> The need for capitalism to grow/seek profit (dynamic) and power of corporations seeking profit is destroying the adjustments mentioned above

A. Modern corporations are threatening the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order.  -> Modern corporations are threatening Marxism/Socialism, not the Hobbes-Locke political order 
B. Marxist socialism is successfully adjusting to the threat of capitalism. ->  Marxist socialism is being "shredded" not adjusting 
C. The threats posed by terrorism have resulted in limitations on personal liberty in many Western governments. ->  2nd sentence of third paragraph, not first sentence  
 D. Capitalism made concessions to Marxist socialism that are now being undone.  -> Shredding = undone, adjustments = concessions made by Capitalism. Correct answer    
E. The West won its battle to stem the spread of socialism in the East. ->  Conflates communism/socialism which are different system, not mentioned in target sentence

D is correct

The way concepts are stated are a bit challenging as it references several political science terms without clearly explaining differences/definitions

yash312 · Answer

imo D

In the West, the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order is very much alive and in the ascendant,...........as the hard-won adjustments to that brought about by a socialism inspired by Marx are  (means Marx socialism is also in ascendant just like ascendant of liberal political order) ,.............. bit by bit(Marx socialism) , being shredded(  Marx socialism was shreded in past to keep capitalism alive )  by the need to keep capitalism dynamic and by the growing power of giant corporations.

therefore, this line states that Damages were done in the past to socialism but now with rise of liberal political order, Marx socialism is also in ascendant mode.

Kudos

A. Modern corporations are threatening the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order. ----Opposite
B. Marxist socialism is successfully adjusting to the threat of capitalism.----Opposite
C. The threats posed by terrorism have resulted in limitations on personal liberty in many Western governments. ----TRUE, but no relevant
D. Capitalism made concessions to Marxist socialism that are now being undone. ---Correct answer
E. The West won its battle to stem the spread of socialism in the East.---out of context

Gladiator59 · Answer

Dense reading! Definitely a challenge in restricted time for someone without a Pol Sci background.

So I went ahead with POE -
 1. Which of the following most accurately describes the meaning of the first sentence of paragraph three?

I am already looking for a structure like this: Capitalism is strong in the west, however, socialism came swooping in and pulled the ways of capitalism towards itself and that is now being pulled back towards the capitalism side by large corporations.

A. Modern corporations are threatening the Hobbes-Locke formulation of liberal political order.  The opposite is the case! Discard. 
B. Marxist socialism is successfully adjusting to the threat of capitalism.  Is it? Not really. The end of the line under the scanner says the opposite. Discard. 
C. The threats posed by terrorism have resulted in limitations on personal liberty in many Western governments.  Out of scope. Discard. 
D. Capitalism made concessions to Marxist socialism that are now being undone.  Fits right into the expected structure, keep.   but I was expecting -  Socialism made concessions into Capitalism are now being undone.   
E. The West won its battle to stem the spread of socialism in the East.  The battle is between capitalism and socialism - not west and east - though this is synonymous and could be a real world trap as the passage does not say so!

A clear D but I am not satisfied.
 sshugart  : Isn't that the big picture?First capitalism won -> then socialism was on the rise ( in the east) and it got support in the form of unions etc. and -> finally capitalism is shredding and coming back into the picture? Would be delighted to know your thoughts.

Hope my comments are helpful.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

For all their significant differences, these philosophers had one thin

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

For all their significant differences, these philosophers had one thin

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards