Q22

[skapur777]

I got the answer A because it seemed the most reasonable but why couldn't it be that C: they emphasized the importance of slavery as an institution to preindustrial Britain? It certainly seems like it was at the time! Why else would notables call for enslavement?

[giladedelman]

Thanks for posting!

(A) is correct because the passage clearly offers this as an example of Eltis "eschewing Drescher's idealization of British traditions of liberty." So he's citing the example to combat Drescher's claims about the strength of British traditions of liberty.

(C) is incorrect because this has nothing to do with slavery as an institution. "Some" notables suggested enslaving these migrant workers, but that's the extent of it; this doesn't intersect at all with the actual institution of slavery that existed in Britain.

(B) is incorrect because this doesn't have anything to do with the strength of the labor force.

(D) is out because this is about the views of the powerful, not the laboring class.

(E) is out of scope -- we don't really know if they had civil rights.

Does that answer your question?

[skapur777]

What's the difference between enslaving people, thus slavery, and slavery as a institution?

[giladedelman]

If we're talking about the importance of slavery as an institution in England, then we're talking about something that actually existed. Not slavery as a concept, but the actual practice of it.

But that's not really the point here. The point is that this line is not emphasizing the importance of slavery. It just says that some people suggested another form of enslavement; this doesn't really speak to whether slavery was really important, somewhat important, not important at all, etc. I mean, if I wrote that some rich Americans in the 1920s suggested outlawing all flat water, that wouldn't emphasize the importance of carbonated water; it's just a suggestion.

More importantly, we determine the role of a sentence by analyzing the context in which it occurs. The context here is not the importance of slavery; the context is the idealized depiction of British traditions of liberty, which this example undermines.

[goriano]

If we're talking about the importance of slavery as an institution in England, then we're talking about something that actually existed. Not slavery as a concept, but the actual practice of it.

But that's not really the point here. The point is that this line is not emphasizing the importance of slavery. It just says that some people suggested another form of enslavement; this doesn't really speak to whether slavery was really important, somewhat important, not important at all, etc. I mean, if I wrote that some rich Americans in the 1920s suggested outlawing all flat water, that wouldn't emphasize the importance of carbonated water; it's just a suggestion.

More importantly, we determine the role of a sentence by analyzing the context in which it occurs. The context here is not the importance of slavery; the context is the idealized depiction of British traditions of liberty, which this example undermines.

I'm still not getting this explanation. If we are looking at the context of the "certain notables," the passage gives us:

Eschewing Drescher's idealization of British traditions of liberty... INDEED, certain notables... --an acceptance of coerced labor that Eltis attributes to a preindustrial desire...

So my question is the "certain notables" can be seen as supporting the eschewing of Drescher's idealization OR an acceptance of coerced labor. If the latter, it seems that answer (C) would be well supported. Since (C) is not the correct answer, how would we know certain notables is meant to be used to support eschewing Drescher's idealiztion? Help!!

[john.o.wray]

I got the answer right, but upon review spent 20 minutes on the question trying to make sense of why the other answers were wrong. It's a tough one.

C is wrong because it sneaks in that term shift that isn't supported by the text. Slavery was not institutionalized (or at least, we can't infer it from that line.)

Also, look at the question-- it asks about what ELTIS thinks, not the author. So we have to look only at that quote in the context of Eltis' beliefs, which the other tells us are to eschew Drescher's idealization of British traditions of liberty. (Exactly answer A)

This was tricky because the question is essentially asking what Eltis was trying to prove.

[Mab6q]

Very tricky question if we don't stay focused on what Eltis' paragraph is about. He begins by eschewing Drescher, disagreeing that personal liberty was the key factor. He does this by showing that the important consideration, instead, was the labor force. Particularly keeping labor costs low and exports competitive. I believe we could've had this as an AC, but remember this is used in the bigger picture to reject D's opinion.

Looking at C, it focuses on the wrong aspect. It's not that slavery itself was the important consideration, but instead cheap labor, with the former thought of as a means to achieve the latter. That's why C misses the mark. B, on the other hand, is a more interesting choice since it talks about the labor force. However the emphasis, again, is not on a "strong labor force" but one that was cheap. So B also falls short. A is the best AC because it hits at the fact that all this is mentioned to weaken D's point.