interventionism

简明释义

英[ˌɪntəˈvenʃənɪzəm]美[ˌɪntərˈvenʃənɪzəm]

n. 干涉主义（尤指主张干预国际事务）

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Second part: the exhibition and characters of American new interventionism.

第二部分：美国新干涉主义的表现及特点。

2.We now consider anti-interventionism in this light .

现在我们以这个意义上来考虑反干预主义。

3.After all of these failures of interventionism and “activist” monetary and fiscal policy in the 1930s, the same public policy madness is still recommended as “wisdom” today.

尽管所有这些干预主义与“积极的”货币与财政政策在30年代遭到了失败，在今日，同样的公共政策的疯狂建议是依然会被认为是“明智”之举。

4.The U. S. political and policy elites increasingly display signs of being addicted to interventionism, with the American people paying the price in both blood and treasure for that addiction.

美国政坛的精英们越发传递出干预成瘾的迹象，而美国人民则必须为这些流血牺牲和财富买单。

5.France's love affair with state interventionism began in the 17th century, and tends to flare up when the country feels under threat.

法国人对国家干预主义的极大热情始于17世纪，并在国家面临威胁时更加高涨。

6.The next step in the logic of monetary interventionism is a currency crisis.

下一步的货币干涉主义的逻辑是货币危机。

7.The rise of interventionism in international relations has sparked debates about sovereignty.

国际关系中干预主义的兴起引发了关于主权的辩论。

8.The government adopted a policy of interventionism to stabilize the economy during the recession.

政府采取了干预主义政策，以在经济衰退期间稳定经济。

9.Critics of interventionism believe it infringes on individual freedoms.

批评干预主义的人认为它侵犯了个人自由。

10.The debate over interventionism has been a major topic in foreign policy discussions.

关于干预主义的辩论一直是外交政策讨论中的一个主要话题。

11.Many economists argue that interventionism can lead to market distortions.

许多经济学家认为，干预主义可能导致市场扭曲。

作文

Interventionism has become a significant topic of discussion in both political and economic spheres. At its core, interventionism refers to the policy or practice of intervening in the affairs of other nations or economies, often with the aim of promoting stability, democracy, or economic growth. The debate surrounding interventionism is complex, as it raises questions about sovereignty, ethics, and the effectiveness of foreign involvement in domestic issues.Historically, interventionism has been justified on various grounds. Proponents argue that it can prevent humanitarian crises, promote human rights, and foster economic development. For instance, military interventions in the 1990s, such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo, were largely framed as necessary actions to stop ethnic cleansing and protect civilians. In these scenarios, interventionism was seen as a moral obligation, a way for more powerful nations to assist those in dire need.However, critics of interventionism raise valid concerns about its implications. They argue that foreign interventions often lead to unintended consequences, such as prolonged conflicts, destabilization of regions, and resentment towards intervening nations. The Iraq War, initiated under the premise of removing a tyrannical regime and promoting democracy, serves as a stark example of how interventionism can backfire. Instead of stabilizing the region, the intervention led to years of conflict, loss of life, and a power vacuum that allowed extremist groups to flourish.The economic aspect of interventionism is equally contentious. Economic interventionism involves government actions aimed at influencing economic activity within a country, often through regulations, tariffs, or subsidies. While some argue that such measures can protect domestic industries and promote economic growth, others contend that they can lead to inefficiencies and trade disputes. The tension between free-market principles and the need for government intervention is a central theme in discussions about economic interventionism.In recent years, the rise of populism and nationalism has further complicated the discourse on interventionism. Many citizens are increasingly skeptical of foreign involvement, believing that their governments should prioritize domestic issues over international ones. This shift is evident in the backlash against globalism and the preference for policies that emphasize national sovereignty.As we navigate the complexities of interventionism, it is essential to consider the historical context and the lessons learned from past interventions. A balanced approach is necessary—one that recognizes the potential benefits of intervention while remaining vigilant about the risks. Ultimately, the question of whether interventionism is justified depends on the specific circumstances and the motivations behind it. It requires careful analysis and a commitment to ethical considerations, ensuring that interventions are not only well-intentioned but also effective in achieving their goals.In conclusion, interventionism remains a contentious issue that evokes strong opinions on both sides. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, understanding the nuances of interventionism is crucial for policymakers and citizens alike. Engaging in informed discussions about the role of intervention in global affairs will help shape a future where interventions, when necessary, are conducted with respect for sovereignty and a genuine commitment to improving the lives of those affected.

干预主义已成为政治和经济领域重要的讨论话题。它的核心含义是，干预主义指的是在其他国家或经济事务中进行干预的政策或做法，通常旨在促进稳定、民主或经济增长。围绕干预主义的辩论十分复杂，因为它引发了关于主权、伦理和外国干预国内问题有效性的问题。从历史上看，干预主义在各种理由的支持下被合理化。支持者认为，它可以防止人道危机、促进人权并推动经济发展。例如，1990年代的军事干预，如波斯尼亚和科索沃的干预，主要被框架为必要行动，以制止种族清洗和保护平民。在这些情况下，干预主义被视为一种道德义务，是更强大的国家帮助急需援助者的一种方式。然而，干预主义的批评者提出了有效的担忧。他们认为，外国干预往往会导致意想不到的后果，例如冲突的延续、地区的不稳定以及对干预国的怨恨。伊拉克战争以消除专制政权和促进民主为名发起，成为了干预主义可能适得其反的一个鲜明例子。干预没有稳定该地区，反而导致了数年的冲突、生命损失以及导致极端主义团体繁荣的权力真空。干预主义的经济方面同样引发争议。经济干预主义涉及政府旨在影响国内经济活动的措施，通常通过法规、关税或补贴来实现。虽然一些人认为这些措施可以保护国内产业并促进经济增长，但另一些人则认为这可能导致低效和贸易争端。自由市场原则与政府干预需求之间的紧张关系是关于经济干预主义讨论中的一个核心主题。近年来，民粹主义和民族主义的兴起进一步复杂化了关于干预主义的讨论。许多公民越来越怀疑外国干预，认为他们的政府应该优先考虑国内问题，而不是国际问题。这一转变在对全球化的反弹和对强调国家主权的政策偏好中显而易见。在我们处理干预主义的复杂性时，考虑历史背景和从过去干预中吸取的教训至关重要。需要一种平衡的方法——既承认干预的潜在好处，又保持对风险的警惕。最终，是否认为干预主义是合理的，取决于具体情况及其背后的动机。这需要仔细分析和对伦理考量的承诺，确保干预不仅出于良好的意图，而且在实现目标方面是有效的。总之，干预主义仍然是一个引发双方强烈意见的争议问题。随着世界日益相互联系，理解干预主义的细微差别对于政策制定者和公民而言至关重要。参与有关干预在全球事务中角色的知情讨论，将有助于塑造一个未来，在这个未来中，当干预是必要的时，能够尊重主权，并真诚致力于改善受影响者的生活。