Global Book Corporation - International Media & Distribution Representative In Vietnam

Global Book Corporation - International Media & Distribution Representative In Vietnam

Global Book Corporation - International Media & Distribution Representative In Vietnam

Đăng ký Đăng nhập

Hướng dẫn MUA HÀNG

Hình thức THANH TOÁN

Chính sách BẢO MẬT



Chưa có sản phẩm trong giỏ hàng
Return To Shop

The Economist: The new ideology of race: and what’s wrong with it - No.28 - 11th Jul 20

Liên hệ

Tạp chí The Economist là tạp chí uy tín của Anh với lịch sử hơn 176 năm hình thành. The Economist nổi tiếng với văn phong hàn lâm, chuyên sâu về các vấn đề chính trị, kinh tế trên toàn thế giới. Mỗi tuần có hơn 1.7 triệu bản đến tay độc giả trên 200 quốc gia. Hiện ấn bản nhập về Việt Nam là phiên bản cho khu vực Châu Á - Thái Bình Dương.

Lợi thế của The Economist:

+Tạp chí 176 năm hình thành

+Được viết bởi chuyên gia The Economist

+Là tạp chí ưa thích của các doanh nhân hàng đầu thế giới như Bill Gates, Angela Merkel,.... 

+Có các số liệu, sơ đồ, hình ảnh trực quan trong các bài viết

+Có các bài viết được đưa vào đề thi đọc của IELTS.

+Các bài viết có thể được dẫn nguồn trong luận văn, nghiên cứu với lời văn trau chuốt.

Chi tiết sản phẩm

The Economist: The new ideology of race: and what’s wrong with it 


The new ideology of race

America’s problem with racism can be divided into two parts. One contains all the myriad injustices that still blight African-American lives a century and a half after the end of slavery. The other is the way that factions on the right exploit racial division as a political tool. An example of the first occurred on May 25th on a shabby street corner in Minneapolis, when George Floyd was killed by a white policeman. An example of the second occurred on July 3rd, at Mount Rushmore, against the monumental backdrop of the country’s greatest presidents, when Donald Trump sought to inflame a culture war centred on race to boost his chances of a second term. To be successful, a campaign for racial justice needs to deal with both.

Leaders like Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King used vigorous protest and relentless argument to push society towards their vision of equality of opportunity and equality before the law. Most Americans still hew to that classical liberal ideal as do many of those who marched with justified anger over the killing of Mr Floyd. But a dangerous rival approach has emerged from American universities (see article). It rejects the liberal notion of progress. It defines everyone by their race, and every action as racist or anti-racist. It is not yet dominant, but it is dynamic and it is spreading out of the academy into everyday life. If it supplants liberal values, then intimidation will chill open debate and sow division to the disadvantage of all, black and white.


As the economy recovers fiscal policy has to shift

As they first battled the pandemic with lockdowns earlier this year, governments in the rich world pumped cash into the economy almost indiscriminately. Output was collapsing and the speed and scale of support rightly trumped any worries about its cost, accuracy or side-effects. Now lockdowns are easing, there are tentative signs of economic recovery (even in places where covid-19 is still raging) and political debate has shifted to whether, when, and how far to pare back these dauntingly expensive emergency fiscal policies. America’s unemployment top-up scheme expires on July 31st, Britain’s furlough scheme at the end of October. What should governments do?


A better way to contain Iran’s nuclear programme

Much mystery still surrounds the fire that broke out at an important nuclear facility in Iran on July 2nd. Some of the region’s spooks say the blaze was the result of a cyber-attack. Others insist it was a bomb. Suspicion has fallen on Israel and America, which have a history of sabotaging Iran’s nuclear programme. Other episodes have raised eyebrows in recent months—explosions at power plants and near military sites, a gas leak at a chemical plant. Some of these may also have been the work of saboteurs (see article).

It is safe to say that America and Israel are pleased by the outcome: Iran says that the latest incident caused “significant damage”. But what looks like a tactical success is actually evidence of strategic failure. Iran’s nuclear activity had been constrained by the agreement that it signed with world powers in 2015. President Donald Trump, with encouragement from Israel, yanked America out of the accord and heaped sanctions on Iran, claiming that he would be able to negotiate something better. Not only has Mr Trump failed to get a better deal, he has pushed Iran into dangerous new territory.


Check out more at:

Sign up and contact us for purchase The Economist Weekly magazine:

Ms. Ha: 0915 932 392/ 0933 141 569


Gọi điện SMS