2. 职称英语
  3. Napoleon was wrong when he dismissed the British as a nation of shopkeepers

Napoleon was wrong when he dismissed the British as a nation of shopkeepers

游客2025-01-11  31
问题     Napoleon was wrong when he dismissed the British as a nation of shopkeepers (and hence unfit to defeat France in war). Compared with France, Britain in the 1790s already had a bigger manufacturing base, a higher income per head and hence a tax base wide enough to pay for 22 years of conflict that led to the emperor’s Waterloo. Indeed, the demand for ships and munitions, created by the long war against France, boosted British industry.
    Two centuries later, however, the little Corsican may have a point. This week ICI, the company that once symbolised British industry, became the target of a takeover bid from Akzo Nobel, a Dutch competitor. Meanwhile, Britain’s Tesco supermarket group is boldly expanding into America and other foreign markets in a bid to overtake France’s Carrefour (sorry, Monsieur l’Empereur) to become the world’s second-biggest retailer behind Wal-Mart. Britain has a much more open economy than America, measured by foreign trade or capital flows. Indeed, there could be no greater testimony to its health than the unsentimental ability to let one-time national champions float quietly off into another’s embrace.
    Imperial Chemical Industries was born on the liner Aquitania in the mid-Atlantic when four British chemical barons of the 1920s agreed to combine forces. But the company started coming apart in the 1990s. It balked at buying Glaxo to become a world-class drugs company. Funking as predator, it became prey itself. Prodded by the threat of a hostile break-up bid from Lord Hanson, a corporate raider at the height of his powers, ICI floated off its drugs division, now AstraZeneca.
    As it moved upmarket, ICI became progressively less imperial, less chemical and less industrial. It paid too much for Unilever’s specialty chemicals business and struggled to pay down the debt it incurred by selling its commodity petrochemicals operations at just the wrong point in the cycle. Its giant petrochemicals complex on Teesside—once the very symbol of British manufacturing strength—was sold to some Americans and now belongs to a Saudi company.
    Such sell-offs go almost without comment now in Britain. When investors from Dubai snapped up P&O, another commercial relic of the British empire, Britons shrugged, even as nationalistic opposition in America forced the Arab buyers to find someone more trustworthy to take on the ports it owned there. German and French firms have snapped up British water and electricity companies, and London’s airports belong to a Spanish construction company. First the Dutch, then the Indians walked off with Britain’s steel industry. The Chinese bought Rover, the rump of Britain’s car industry, and shipped its machine tools back home.
    It may only be a matter of time before BT (conveniently, no longer called British Telecom) becomes the first "national" telecoms incumbent in foreign hands; its mobile arm has already been taken by Spain’s Telefonica. Likewise BAE Systems (no longer British Aerospace) sees its future in America, perhaps in the belly of a beast named Boeing, Northrop Grumman or Lockheed Martin.
    In most countries that would count as a litany of failure. But just as Britain led the world into industrialisation, so now Britain is leading it out. Today you can still find a few British engineers and scientists making jet engines and pharmaceuticals—and doing rather well at it. But many more are cooking up algorithms for hedge funds and investment banks—where in many cases they add more value. The economy has boomed these past 15 years, as manufacturing has been left behind and London has become the world’s leading international financial centre. Britain’s deficit in manufactured goods is hitting record highs. But so are the capital inflows.
    All those foreign investors have brought a lot, too. Nissan’s car factory in Sunderland, for instance, is one of its finest anywhere. If foreigners think they can manage British factories or finances better than the natives can, they are welcome. [br] What does "go without comment" (Para. 5) mean?
选项 A、People don’t comment on it.
B、It becomes a matter of course.
C、Sell-offs carry on smoothly.
D、Britons are conventionally silent people.
答案 B
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3908803.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)