-
nandy1984
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:29 pm
- Thanked: 4 times
Some historians contend that conditions in the United States during the Second World War gave rise
to a dynamic wartime alliance between trade unions and the African American community, an alliance that advanced the cause of civil rights. They conclude that the postwar demise of this vital alliance constituted a lost opportunity for the civil rights movement that followed the war. Other scholars, however, have portrayed organized labor as defending all along the relatively privileged position of White workers relative to African American workers. Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other. Unions faced a choice between either maintaining the prewar status quo or promoting a more inclusive approach that sought for all members the right to participate in the internal affairs of unions, access to skilled and high-paying positions within the occupational hierarchy, and protection against management's arbitrary authority in the workplace. While union representatives often voiced this inclusive ideal, in practice unions far more often favored entrenched interests. The accelerating development of the civil rights movement following the Second World War exacerbated the unions' dilemma, forcing trade unionists to confront contradictions in their own practices.
Q. The passage is primarily concerned with
(A) providing a context within which to evaluate opposing viewpoints about a historical phenomenon
(B) identifying a flawed assumption underlying one interpretation of a historical phenomenon
(C) assessing the merits and weaknesses of a controversial theory about a historical phenomenon
(D) discussing the historical importance of the development of a wartime alliance
(E) evaluating evidence used to support a particular interpretation of a historical phenomenon
ANSWER:
From the above passage this is what i understood without going in to details...
There are 2 perspectives discussed of a situation/phenomena. And the author says we cannot conclude to either one of them ("Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other."). After the above statement i did not understand anything in the passage.
So now i started looking at the answer choices to eliminate them
A) opposing view points --- keep it
B) There is no flawed assumption --- so wrong
C) Merits and weakness of CONTROVERSIAL THEORY --- there is nothing like controversial -- WRONG
D) WAR TIME ALLIANCE --- This talks only about the part of the passage --- WRONG
E) SUPPORT A PARTICULAR INTERPRETATION --- ("Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other.") --- WRONG
The answer is A...
I need your/EXPERT help here...What i have done here is good? or In what areas of answering or understanding the passage i need to improve?..If you are doing this problem how do you approach this and solve it...Please dont mention only the answers as i know whats the correct answer is..I am looking for how to solve the RC Main idea problems, so please explain the actual process you do...How do you write the main point/ drill down to main point/how do you interpret the passage/ what questions/keywords you look for to come to the main idea..Here i have not understood the passage completely, this is wrong..so if we face a problem in understanding the passage what can be done?...its a silly question but will help me and many people....Thanks
to a dynamic wartime alliance between trade unions and the African American community, an alliance that advanced the cause of civil rights. They conclude that the postwar demise of this vital alliance constituted a lost opportunity for the civil rights movement that followed the war. Other scholars, however, have portrayed organized labor as defending all along the relatively privileged position of White workers relative to African American workers. Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other. Unions faced a choice between either maintaining the prewar status quo or promoting a more inclusive approach that sought for all members the right to participate in the internal affairs of unions, access to skilled and high-paying positions within the occupational hierarchy, and protection against management's arbitrary authority in the workplace. While union representatives often voiced this inclusive ideal, in practice unions far more often favored entrenched interests. The accelerating development of the civil rights movement following the Second World War exacerbated the unions' dilemma, forcing trade unionists to confront contradictions in their own practices.
Q. The passage is primarily concerned with
(A) providing a context within which to evaluate opposing viewpoints about a historical phenomenon
(B) identifying a flawed assumption underlying one interpretation of a historical phenomenon
(C) assessing the merits and weaknesses of a controversial theory about a historical phenomenon
(D) discussing the historical importance of the development of a wartime alliance
(E) evaluating evidence used to support a particular interpretation of a historical phenomenon
ANSWER:
From the above passage this is what i understood without going in to details...
There are 2 perspectives discussed of a situation/phenomena. And the author says we cannot conclude to either one of them ("Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other."). After the above statement i did not understand anything in the passage.
So now i started looking at the answer choices to eliminate them
A) opposing view points --- keep it
B) There is no flawed assumption --- so wrong
C) Merits and weakness of CONTROVERSIAL THEORY --- there is nothing like controversial -- WRONG
D) WAR TIME ALLIANCE --- This talks only about the part of the passage --- WRONG
E) SUPPORT A PARTICULAR INTERPRETATION --- ("Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other.") --- WRONG
The answer is A...
I need your/EXPERT help here...What i have done here is good? or In what areas of answering or understanding the passage i need to improve?..If you are doing this problem how do you approach this and solve it...Please dont mention only the answers as i know whats the correct answer is..I am looking for how to solve the RC Main idea problems, so please explain the actual process you do...How do you write the main point/ drill down to main point/how do you interpret the passage/ what questions/keywords you look for to come to the main idea..Here i have not understood the passage completely, this is wrong..so if we face a problem in understanding the passage what can be done?...its a silly question but will help me and many people....Thanks
