PrepTest 101, Section 4, Question 23
Two impressive studies have reexamined Eric Williams' conclusion(454 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(23 more words not shown)
- ABritish populism appealed(8 more words not shown)
- BBoth capitalists and(9 more words not shown)
- CForced labor in(11 more words not shown)
- DThe operation of(10 more words not shown)
- EBritish workers became(14 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Williams thinks the colonies had become a burden on Britain's economy. Depleted soil, debt, and inefficient forced labor made them a drag on Britain’s economic advancement (paragraph 1). That gives us our answer: on his account, Britain acted because the arrangement was no longer economically beneficial. Keep his explanation separate from Eltis's later argument about the growing consumer market.
Working the answers
- A
The cross-class populist movement is Drescher's focus, not Williams's explanation.
- B
Williams's account emphasizes economic rather than humanitarian motives. We aren't told he attributes abolition to capitalists and workers accepting a moral argument.
- C
Williams names economic problems, but not this specific shortage relative to consumer demand. Inefficient production doesn't by itself mean the colonies couldn't supply enough goods to meet that demand.
- DCorrect
This restates Williams's claim that the forced-labor colonies had become an economic impediment. It is the reason his account gives for Britain's reforms.
- E
Williams doesn't describe workers believing colonial slavery held down their wages. Wages appear later in Eltis's account, in a different role: encouraging work and creating consumers.
More Detail questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Detail questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.