reading.docx

1、readingHungary steps outTHE symbolism was telling. Inside Budapests Opera House, Hungarys great and good were knocking back sparkling wine at a gala event to celebrate the inauguration of the countrys new constitution, which came into effect on January 1st. Outside, on Andrssy Avenue, tens of thousa

2、nds of protestors demanded its withdrawal.Brushing off the demonstrations, President Pal Schmitt hailed Hungarys new basic law as a brave new dawn. It may well be, but probably not the kind that Hungarys rulers are hoping for. As the blog Contrarian Hungarian reports, protestors are increasingly tak

3、ing control of the streets. The Andrssy Avenue march was just the latest in a series of public actions against the governments growing autocratic tendencies and its relentless centralisation of power. Mondays protests were significant as well as symbolic. This was the first time that opposition part

4、iesthe Socialists, the Democratic Coalition and the green-liberal LMPhad joined forces with street activists. Peter Konya, leader of the Hungarian Solidarity Movement, welcomed what he called “the long absent co-operation between civil groups and parties of the democratic opposition”.Gabor Ivanyi, a

5、 Methodist pastor, told the crowd that “There is no truth where laws are passed forcefully, without consultations, where people live in fear and where people are not equal.” Mr Ivanyi is one of 13 former dissidents and liberal politicians to have signed a letter calling for the European Union to int

6、ervene and protect Hungarian democracy.Government officials deny that Hungarian democracy is in danger. How, they ask, can this be so when an enormous crowd is free to demonstrate outside the very building where they are celebrating? In 2010 the right-wing Fidesz party won a two-thirds parliamentary

7、 majority in a free and fair election, they argue, and the government is simply fulfilling its mandate of radical change and renewal. But as the government brushes off requests from the EU, the IMF, the European Central Bank and the United States to reconsider key legislation that may be in breach o

8、f its international treaty obligations, such arguments sound increasingly unconvincing.Ten years of China in the WTO CHINAS efforts to join the World Trade Organisation (WTO) dragged on for 15 years, long enough to “turn black hair white”, as Zhu Rongji, Chinas former prime minister, put it. (His ow

9、n hair remained Politburo-black throughout.) Even after membership was granted, ten years ago this week, Mr Zhu expected many “headaches”, including the loss of customs duties and the distress of farmers exposed to foreign competition. Yet the bet paid off for China. It has blossomed into the worlds

10、 greatest exporter and second-biggest importer. The marriage of foreign know-how, Chinese labour and the open, global market has succeeded beyond anyones predictions. It is instead Chinas trading partners who now contemplate its WTO membership with furrowed brows (see article). They have a variety o

11、f complaints: that China exports too much, swamping their markets with cheap manufactured goods, subsidised by an undervalued currency; that it hoards essential inputs, such as rare earths, for its own firms; and that it still skews its own market against foreign companies, in some cases by being sl

12、ow to implement WTO rules (notably on piracy), in others by suddenly imposing unwritten rules that are unfavourable or unknowable to foreigners. The meddling state lets multinationals in, only to squeeze them dry of their valuable technologies and then push them out. Much of this criticism is right.

13、 China made heroic reforms in the years around its WTO entry. That raised expectations that it has conspicuously failed to meet. It signed up for multilateral rules, but neglected the rule of law at home. Free trade did not bring wider freedoms, and even the trade was not exactly free. It is in Chin

14、as interest to liberalise its exchange rate further, to prevent local officials from discriminating against foreigners and above all to do far more to support the global trading system. The WTO is undermined when any member flouts the rules, never mind one as big as China. Too big to be a bystandero

15、r to be kept out But Chinas sins should be put into perspective. In terms of global trade consumers everywhere have gained from cheap Chinese goods. Chinese growth has created a huge market for other countries exports. And Chinas remaining barriers are often exaggerated. It is more open to imports t

16、han Japan was at the same stage of development, more open to foreign direct investment than South Korea was until the 1990s. Its tariffs are capped at 10% on average; Brazils at over 30%. And in China, unlike India, you can shop at Walmart, most of the time. As for the hurdles foreign firms face in

17、China, they are disgracefulbut sadly no worse than in other developing countries. The grumbles are louder in China chiefly because the stakes are higher. Foreigners may have won a smaller slice of Chinas market than they had hoped, but China is a bigger pie than anyone dared to expect. Had China bee

18、n kept out of the WTO, there would have been less growth for everybody. And the WTO still provides the best means to discipline and cajole. Rather than delivering congressional ultimatums, America and others could make more use of the WTOs rules to curb Chinas worst infractions. So celebrate Chinas

19、ten years in the WTO: we are all richer because of it. But, when it comes to trade, Chinas rulers now badly need to grow up. Their cheating is harming their own consumers and stoking up protectionism abroad. That could prove to be economic self-harm on an epic scale.Nuns and contraceptionTHE Catholi

20、c church condemns all forms of contraception, a policy that Paul VI laid out in detail in Humanae Vitae in 1968. Over the subsequent decades it has had various brawls with secular authorities over the use of birth control pills. Most recently, Americas bishops have fought to keep Barack Obamas healt

21、h law from providing contraception free. The church has already won an exemption for women who work for a church, but it also wants to keep coverage from women who work for any Catholic institution, even if the women in question are not Catholics and the institution has a secular purpose, such as a

22、school, say, or hospital. Given all this, it would seem unlikely that the church would want to give the Pill to its nuns.Yet that is precisely what a recent paper in the Lancet suggests. Its authors, Kara Britt and Roger Short, of Monash University and the University of Melbourne, urge the Church to

23、 provide oral contraception to the sisters. Nuns need the Pill not to prevent pregnancy, but to prevent cancer. In 1713, the authors write, an Italian doctor observed that nuns had a very high rate of that “accursed pest”, breast cancer. Modern studies have confirmed that Catholic have a higher risk

24、 than most women of dying from breast, ovarian and uterine cancers. Women who bear children have fewer menstrual cycles, thanks to both pregnancy and lactation (which suppresses menstruation). Other studies have established a relationship between menstrual cycles and the prevalence of cancer, with f

25、ewer cycles meaning a smaller risk. Nuns - who are required to be celibate - experience more cycles than the typical woman, and therefore run a higher risk of developing cancer. The Pill can help to counteract this. The overall mortality in women who use, or have used, oral contraception, is 12% low

26、er than among those who do not. The effect on ovarian and endometrial cancer is greater: the risk of such cancers plummets by about 50%. Drs Britt and Short make a compelling medical case. But it is unlikely to sway the ChurchCrying freedom CROSSING an Athens street by foot on a warm spring afternoo

27、n in 1985, I checked a taxi waiting at the light to make sure it was not going to jump the red. In the back seat I spied the unmistakeable figure of Christopher Hitchens, larger than when Id last seen him, larger than anyone in their mid-30s ought to be, made larger still by an unnecessary overcoat

28、thrown over the shoulders in the manner of a ballet impresario from an earlier time. He saw me, called my name, threw open the door and stepped into the street. The light was now green and traffic was hooting. Heedless as ever to context but wholly in role, he let go an uncounted shower of drachma n

29、otes into the grateful drivers hand and greeted me theatrically with a kiss on both cheeks. Like me, he was in Athens to write about the Greek elections. The previous day, Andreas Papandreouthe father of the recently replaced prime ministerhad handily won a second parliamentary term as leader of his

30、 countrys Social Democrats. Though not like me, because Christopher was not like other journalists. “I didnt see you at the Press centre last night,” I said. “No,” he replied, “I was at the Papandreous.” How the next hours unfolded, I dont recall. I do vividly remember that around two in the morning

31、, Christopher was entertaining a small group of us at a restaurantquoting, parrying, recounting, provoking. His speed of memory was daunting. He always seemed able to cite what an opponent in argument had said or written years earlier, deploying it quickly and wittily at the surest moment to expose

32、them as fools, ditherers or hypocrites. That essentially 18th-century skill made him as lethal on television as he was on the page. He wrote the way he spoke, in boutades and in paragraphs, often with a blood-level of alcohol that would leave most of us speechless. He was catholic in his love and knowledge of the written word, but on the whole stayed off movies, theatre, visual arts and music. Had he a trace of Puritan suspicion that such arts were elite, effete and not morally serious? I suspect it was more that each of those arts has its standards of performance and