Reading comprehensions form a very important part in all the entrance exams for PGDM/MBA course. They are included in the Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension section of the CAT question paper. Apart from CAT, these questions also form a part of MBA/PGDM exams like XAT, SNAP, IIFT etc. From the trends of previous years CAT papers, it is evident that Reading comprehensions forms around half of the total questions in the VARC section. Reading comprehension can cover many topics like science, history, geography, current affairs, Economics, humanities, etc. Here, we will discuss the reading comprehensions on Economics.
Below are the details about the number of reading comprehension on economics questions for different competitive MBA exam:
The Reading Comprehension passages in CAT question paper also include economics as a topic:
Passages on this topic can include topics like demand, supply, production, consumption, and the inter-relation between them. The Reading Comprehensions for CAT question paper are either idea-driven or data-driven. Once you have a passage in front of you, the first aim should be to understand what the author wants to convey.
It is always advisable to skim through the passage in the first chance to understand the basic story-line of the passage. One might skip the data and values given in this chance. The next reading, when one is comfortable with the passage length and basic idea, should be the in-depth one.
Reading the questions before reading the passage will help the student to find the correct answers quickly and efficiently.
The word ‘anarchy’ comes from the Greek anarkhia, meaning contrary to authority or without a ruler, and was used in a derogatory sense until 1840, when it was adopted by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon to describe his political and social ideology. Proudhon argued that organization without government was both possible and desirable. In the evolution of political ideas, anarchism can be seen as an ultimate projection of both liberalism and socialism, and the differing strands of anarchist thought can be related to their emphasis on one or the other of these.
Historically, anarchism arose not only as an explanation of the gulf between the rich and the poor in any community, and of the reason why the poor have been obliged to fight for their share of a common inheritance, but as a radical answer to the question ‘What went wrong?’ that followed the ultimate outcome of the French Revolution. It had ended not only with a reign of terror and the emergence of a newly rich ruling caste, but with a new adored emperor, Napoleon Bonaparte, strutting through his conquered territories.
The anarchists and their precursors were unique on the political Left in affirming that workers and peasants, grasping the chance that arose to bring an end to centuries of exploitation and tyranny, were inevitably betrayed by the new class of politicians, whose first priority was to reestablish a centralized state power. After every revolutionary uprising, usually won at a heavy cost for ordinary populations, the new rulers had no hesitation in applying violence and terror, a secret police, and a professional army to maintain their control.
For anarchists the state itself is the enemy, and they have applied the same interpretation to the outcome of every revolution of the 19th and 20th centuries. This is not merely because every state keeps a watchful and sometimes punitive eye on its dissidents, but because every state protects the privileges of the powerful.
The mainstream of anarchist propaganda for more than a century has been anarchistcommunism, which argues that property in land, natural resources, and the means of production should be held in mutual control by local communities, federating for innumerable joint purposes with other communes. It differs from state socialism in opposing the concept of any central authority. Some anarchists prefer to distinguish between anarchist-communism and collectivist anarchism in order to stress the obviously desirable freedom of an individual or family to possess the resources needed for living, while not implying the right to own the resources needed by others. . . .
There are, unsurprisingly, several traditions of individualist anarchism, one of them deriving from the ‘conscious egoism’ of the German writer Max Stirner (1806–56), and another from a remarkable series of 19th-century American figures who argued that in protecting our own autonomy and associating with others for common advantages, we are promoting the good of all. These thinkers differed from free-market liberals in their absolute mistrust of American capitalism, and in their emphasis on mutualism.
[CAT 2020 Slot 1]
Q 1: Which one of the following best expresses the similarity between American individualist anarchists and free-market liberals as well as the difference between the former and the latter?
A. Both reject the regulatory power of the state; but the former favour a people’s state, while the latter favour state intervention in markets.
B. Both prioritise individual autonomy; but the former also emphasise mutual dependence, while the latter do not do so.
C. Both are sophisticated arguments for capitalism; but the former argue for a morally upright capitalism, while the latter argue that the market is the only morality.
D. Both are founded on the moral principles of altruism; but the latter conceive of the market as a force too mystical for the former to comprehend.
For the understanding of the candidate, preparation has been divided into 3 levels: