Reading Comprehension
Verbal Ability

 Back to Questions

Common Information

In the pantheon of great thinkers, Karl Marx certainly ranks as one of the most influential, even if it has been said that no thinker has ever had his words more badly misrepresented, by supporters and detractors alike, than Karl Marx. After Marx, no social discipline was safe from an assault by Marxist thinkers. However, while the views and insights brought to bear by Marxists have helped to illuminate relationships in some disciplines, the Marxist worldview has been less successful when applied to certain human interactions.

For example, Marxist perspectives on global power relations have been assailed by many critics. Because Marx himself was especially concerned with economics, his followers have tended to elevate economic concerns, including the class struggle and control over the means of production, over all other areas. Thus, when analyzing the balance of power on a global level, key concepts such as nationalism, security, and the state are virtually ignored by Marxist scholars.

On a theoretical level, it may be useful to strip away these concepts to more closely examine certain other dynamics at work, but the Marxist view often fails to describe what actually happens in the real world. Consider the strong nationalism evident in Poland, even after generations of one-party Communist rule.

Also, the Marxist devotion to capitalism leads to simplifications on the world stage. Marxist political scientists typically refer to the "world capitalist system" when analyzing interactions among nations, but this definition has less and less relevance when applied to the variety of economies at work in the world. Where do countries with transitional or developing economies such as China, Russia, and North Korea fit into this schema? Ultimately, a Marxist view of global interactions sacrifices a great many crucial concepts at the altar of one overarching economic perspective. Some critics have likened such a view to an analysis of Shakespeare’s Hamlet that neglects to discuss the protagonist and his motivations.


Common Information Question: 3/4

The passage suggests that the author would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements?


Global power relations are too complex to be effectively explained in terms of a single variable.


The Marxist view of global relations should be abandoned because of its failures to accurately describe the world.


The economies of China, Russia, and Korea will eventually transition to fully fledged capitalism.


Marx’s followers have misrepresented his work in an effort to apply his economic ideas to a global setting.


Any view of global relationships must include concepts of nationalism, security, and the state in order to accurately describe the world.

 Hide Ans

Option(A) is correct

This is an inference question. Use the answer choices to guide your reading. The passage mentions the "simplifications" of the Marxist view and says "Ultimately, a Marxist view of global interactions sacrifices a great many crucial concepts at the altar of one overarching economic perspective." This supports choice A.

Choices B and E both go too far; the author may not agree with the Marxist view but never says it should be abandoned. And while the passage calls nationalism, security, and the state "key concepts," the passage doesn’t say they "must" be included.

There is no support for choice C because the author doesn’t discuss what will happen in the future.

Choice D uses a lot of words from the passage but the meaning is incorrect.

(3) Comment(s)


Why is option D invalid? I feel that is what the author has mentioned right from the beginning of the passage.


I agree with your statement


It's mentioned that Marx's words have been represented by followers. BUT it's nowhere mentioned that it has been done to apply his global idea to a global setting.

It actually doesn't make sense. You can't misrepresent and apply the same thing, right?