statism

简明释义

英[ˈsteɪtɪzəm]美[ˈsteɪtɪzəm]

n. 国家主义；中央集权制；中央集权下的经济统制

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.In later century, public administration was first influenced by behaviorism and post-behaviorism, and then impacted by anti-statism and post-modernism.

此后百年来，公共行政的理论先后经历了行为主义与后行为主义的影响，反国家主义与后现代思潮的冲击。

2.While Chinese media should avoid nationalism and statism in their reports of European countries.

中国媒体也要避免对欧洲报道中的民族主义和国家主义。

3.In later century, public administration was first influenced by behaviorism and post-behaviorism, and then impacted by anti-statism and post-modernism.

此后百年来，公共行政的理论先后经历了行为主义与后行为主义的影响，反国家主义与后现代思潮的冲击。

4.Many economists argue that statism can stifle innovation and competition.

许多经济学家认为，国家主义可能会抑制创新和竞争。

5.The rise of statism has been observed in several countries during economic downturns.

在经济衰退期间，多个国家观察到了国家主义的兴起。

6.Critics of statism believe it leads to inefficiency in public services.

批评国家主义的人认为它导致公共服务的低效。

7.The government's approach to healthcare reflects a strong sense of statism.

政府对医疗保健的处理反映出一种强烈的国家主义。

8.In times of crisis, statism often becomes more appealing to the public.

在危机时期，国家主义往往对公众更具吸引力。

作文

Statism, defined as the concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government, has been a topic of debate for many years. Many people view statism (国家主义) as a necessary approach to ensure that the economy functions smoothly and that social welfare is prioritized. However, others argue that statism (国家主义) can lead to inefficiencies, lack of innovation, and an overreliance on government intervention. This essay will explore both sides of the argument, highlighting the benefits and drawbacks of statism (国家主义) in modern society.One of the primary arguments in favor of statism (国家主义) is that it allows for a more equitable distribution of resources. In a purely capitalist system, wealth tends to concentrate in the hands of a few individuals or corporations, leading to significant disparities in income and opportunity. Proponents of statism (国家主义) argue that government intervention can help redistribute wealth through taxation and social programs. For instance, countries with strong social safety nets, such as those in Scandinavia, often have lower levels of poverty and greater access to healthcare and education. This suggests that a degree of statism (国家主义) can be beneficial for societal well-being.Moreover, statism (国家主义) can provide stability during economic crises. When markets fail, as seen during the 2008 financial crisis, governments often step in to rescue failing industries and stimulate the economy. This intervention can prevent mass unemployment and maintain social order. Critics of laissez-faire capitalism argue that without some level of statism (国家主义), economies would be more prone to volatility and collapse. They believe that a proactive government can mitigate these risks and promote long-term economic growth.However, there are significant criticisms of statism (国家主义) that cannot be overlooked. One major concern is that excessive government control can stifle individual initiative and entrepreneurship. If the government plays a dominant role in the economy, individuals may feel less motivated to innovate or take risks. This can lead to stagnation and a lack of progress in technology and business practices. Historical examples, such as the Soviet Union, demonstrate how extreme statism (国家主义) can result in economic inefficiencies and a lack of consumer choice.Furthermore, statism (国家主义) can lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies. When the government is responsible for managing large sectors of the economy, it can become bogged down by red tape and slow decision-making processes. This can hinder responsiveness to market changes and consumer needs, ultimately harming the economy. Critics argue that a more market-oriented approach encourages competition and efficiency, which can lead to better products and services for consumers.In conclusion, statism (国家主义) presents both opportunities and challenges for modern societies. While it can promote social equity and provide stability during crises, it also risks stifling innovation and creating bureaucratic inefficiencies. The key lies in finding a balance between government intervention and market freedom. A mixed economy that incorporates elements of both statism (国家主义) and capitalism may offer the best solution, allowing for both social welfare and economic dynamism. Ultimately, the debate over statism (国家主义) is not just about economics; it reflects deeper philosophical questions about the role of government in our lives and the values we prioritize as a society.

国家主义，定义为将经济控制和规划集中在高度集中的政府手中，多年来一直是一个辩论的话题。许多人认为国家主义（statism）是一种必要的方法，以确保经济顺利运作，并优先考虑社会福利。然而，其他人则认为国家主义（statism）可能导致低效率、缺乏创新，以及对政府干预的过度依赖。本文将探讨这一论点的两面，强调国家主义（statism）在现代社会中的利弊。支持国家主义（statism）的主要论点之一是它允许资源的更公平分配。在完全自由市场的资本主义体系中，财富往往集中在少数个人或企业手中，导致收入和机会的显著差异。国家主义（statism）的支持者认为，政府干预可以通过税收和社会项目来帮助重新分配财富。例如，拥有强大社会安全网的国家，如斯堪的纳维亚国家，通常拥有较低的贫困水平和更大的医疗和教育获取机会。这表明一定程度的国家主义（statism）对社会福祉是有益的。此外，国家主义（statism）可以在经济危机期间提供稳定。当市场崩溃时，如2008年金融危机所见，政府通常会介入拯救濒临破产的行业并刺激经济。这种干预可以防止大规模失业并维护社会秩序。对放任自流的资本主义的批评者认为，如果没有某种程度的国家主义（statism），经济将更容易遭受波动和崩溃。他们相信，积极的政府可以减轻这些风险并促进长期经济增长。然而，对于国家主义（statism）有重要的批评，不能被忽视。一个主要的担忧是，过度的政府控制可能会抑制个人的主动性和创业精神。如果政府在经济中扮演主导角色，个人可能会感到创新或冒险的动力不足。这可能导致停滞和技术与商业实践的缺乏进步。历史例子，如苏联，证明了极端的国家主义（statism）如何导致经济低效和消费者选择的缺乏。此外，国家主义（statism）可能导致官僚低效。当政府负责管理经济的多个部门时，可能会因繁文缛节而陷入困境，决策过程变得缓慢。这可能妨碍对市场变化和消费者需求的响应，最终损害经济。批评者认为，更以市场为导向的方法鼓励竞争和效率，这可以为消费者提供更好的产品和服务。总之，国家主义（statism）为现代社会带来了机遇和挑战。虽然它可以促进社会公平并在危机期间提供稳定，但它也可能抑制创新并造成官僚低效。关键在于找到政府干预与市场自由之间的平衡。结合国家主义（statism）和资本主义元素的混合经济可能提供最佳解决方案，既能实现社会福利，又能保持经济活力。最终，关于国家主义（statism）的辩论不仅仅关乎经济；它反映了我们生活中政府角色的更深层哲学问题，以及作为一个社会我们优先考虑的价值观。