We are challenged to contrast our faith in our own political institutions with that of the Germans in theirs; also to measure the intrinsic strength of that form of political organisation6 called 'democracy' against that other form which is known as 'autocracy7.'
The German state is the most highly developed and efficient type of personal monarchy8 at present known to the world. Its triumphs in certain directions have been apparent from the beginning. It would be sheer waste of time to dispute the fact that Germany was incomparably better prepared, organised, and educated for this war—the purpose of which was the spoliation of her {168} neighbours—than any of her neighbours were for offering resistance.
But what the Freiherr does not touch upon at all is the conflict between certain underlying9 ideas of right and wrong—old ideas, which are held by Russia, France, and ourselves, and which now find themselves confronted by new and strange ideas which have been exceedingly prevalent among the governing classes in Germany for many years past. He does not raise this issue, any more than his fellow-countrymen now raise it either in America or at home. It is true that there was a flamboyant10 outburst from a few faithful Treitschkians and Nietzschians, both in prose and poetry, during those weeks of August and September which teemed11 with German successes; but their voices soon sank below audibility—possibly by order verboten—in a swiftly dying fall. We, however, cannot agree to let this aspect of the matter drop, merely because patriotic13 Germans happen to have concluded that the present time is inopportune for the discussion of it.
There are two clear and separate issues. From the point of view of posterity14 the more important of these, perhaps, may prove to be this conflict in the region of moral ideas. From the point of view of the present generation, however, the chief matter of practical interest is the result of a struggle for the preservation15 of our own institutions, against the aggression16 of a race which has not yet learned the last and hardest lesson of civilisation—how to live and let live.
DEMOCRACY
The present war may result in the bankruptcy17 of the Habsburg and Hohenzollern dynasties. It is very desirable, however, to make clear the fact {169} that the alternative is the bankruptcy of 'democracy.' Our institutions are now being subjected to a severer strain than they have ever yet experienced. Popular government is standing18 its trial. It will be judged by the result; and no one can say that this is an unfair test to apply to human institutions.
No nation, unless it be utterly19 mad, will retain a form of government which from some inherent defect is unable to protect itself against external attack. Is democratic government capable of looking ahead, making adequate and timely preparation, calling for and obtaining from its people the sacrifices which are necessary in order to preserve their own existence? Can it recover ground which has been lost, and maintain a long, costly20, and arduous21 struggle, until, by victory, it has placed national security beyond the reach of danger?
Defeat in the present war would shake popular institutions to their foundations in England as well as France; possibly also in regions which are more remote than either of these. But something far short of defeat—anything indeed in the nature of a drawn22 game or stalemate—would assuredly bring the credit of democracy so low that it would be driven to make some composition with its creditors23.
Words, like other currencies, have a way of changing their values as the world grows older. Until comparatively recent times 'democracy' was a term of contempt, as 'demagogue' still is to-day.
The founders24 of American union abhorred25 'Democracy,'[1] and took every precaution which occurred to them in order to ward26 it off. Their aim was {170} 'Popular,' or 'Representative Government'—a thing which they conceived to lie almost at the opposite pole. Their ideal was a state, the citizens of which chose their leaders at stated intervals27, and trusted them. Democracy, as it appeared in their eyes, was a political chaos28 where the people chose its servants, and expected from them only servility. There was an ever-present danger, calling for stringent29 safeguards, that the first, which they esteemed30 the best of all constitutional arrangements, would degenerate31 into the second, which they judged to be the worst.
Until times not so very remote it was only the enemies of Representative Government, or its most cringing32 flatterers, who spoke33 of it by the title of Democracy. Gradually, however, in the looseness of popular discussions, the sharpness of the original distinction wore off, so that the ideal system and its opposite—the good and the evil—are now confounded together under one name. There is no use fighting against current terminology34; but it is well to bear in mind that terminology has no power to alter facts, and that the difference between the two principles still remains35 as wide as it was at the beginning.
When a people becomes so self-complacent that it mistakes its own ignorance for omniscience—so jealous of authority and impatient of contradiction that it refuses to invest with more than a mere12 shadow of power those whose business it is to govern—when the stock of leadership gives out, or remains hidden and undiscovered under a litter of showy refuse—when those who succeed in pushing themselves to the front are chiefly concerned not to lead, but merely to act the parts of leaders 'in silver slippers36 and amid applause'—when the chiefs of parties are {171} so fearful of unpopularity that they will not assert their own opinions, or utter timely warnings, or proclaim what they know to be the truth—when such things as these come to pass the nation has reached that state which was dreaded37 by the framers of the American Constitution, and which—intending to warn mankind against it—they branded as 'Democracy.'
DANGERS OF SELF-CRITICISM
Self-criticism makes for health in a people; but it may be overdone38. If it purges39 the national spirit it is good; but if it should lead to pessimism40, or to some impatient breach41 with tradition, it is one of the worst evils. One is conscious of a somewhat dangerous tendency in certain quarters at the present time to assume the worst with regard to the working of our own institutions.
Critics of this school have pointed42 out (what is undoubtedly43 true) that Germany has been far ahead of us in her preparations. Every month since war began has furnished fresh evidence of the far-sightedness, resourcefulness, thoroughness, and efficiency of all her military arrangements. Her commercial and financial resources have also been husbanded, and organised in a manner which excites our unwilling44 admiration45. And what perhaps has been the rudest shock of all, is the apparent unity46 and devotion of the whole German people, in support of a war which, without exaggeration, may be said to have cast the shadow of death on every German home.
These critics further insist that our own nation has not shown itself more loyal, and that it did not rouse itself to the emergency with anything approaching the same swiftness. Timidity and a wilful47 {172} self-deception, they say, have marked our policy for years before this war broke out. They marked it again when the crisis came upon us. Have they not marked it ever since war began? And who can have confidence that they will not continue to mark it until the end, whatever the end may be?
The conclusion therefore at which our more despondent48 spirits have arrived, is that the representative system has already failed us—that it has suffered that very degradation49 which liberal minds of the eighteenth century feared so much. How can democracy in the bad sense—democracy which has become decadent—which is concerned mainly with its rights instead of with its duties—with its comforts more than with the sacrifices which are essential to its own preservation—how can such a system make head against an efficient monarchy sustained by the enthusiastic devotion of a vigorous and intelligent people?
It does not seem altogether wise to despair of one's own institutions at the first check. Even democracy, in the best sense, is not a flawless thing. Of all forms of government it is the most delicate, more dependent than any other upon the supply of leaders. There are times of dearth50 when the crop of leadership is a short one. Nor are popular institutions, any more than our own vile51 bodies, exempt52 from disease. Disease, however, is not necessarily fatal. The patient may recover, and in the bracing53 air of a national crisis, such as the present, conditions are favourable54 for a cure.
And, after all, we may remind these critics that in 1792 democracy did in fact make head pretty successfully against monarchy. Though it was miserably56 unprovided, untrained, inferior to its enemies in everything {173} save spirit and leadership, the states of Europe nevertheless—all but England—went down before it, in the years which followed, like a row of ninepins. Then as now, England, guarded by seas and sea-power, had a breathing-space allowed her, in which to adjust the spirit of her people to the new conditions. That Germany will not conquer us with her arms we may well feel confident. But unless we conquer her with our arms—and this is a much longer step—there is a considerable danger that she may yet conquer us with her ideas. In that case the world will be thrown back several hundred years; and the blame for this disaster, should it occur, will be laid—and laid rightly—at the door of Democracy, because it vaunted a system which it had neither the fortitude57 nor the strength to uphold.
IRRECONCILABLE58 OPPOSITIONS59
When we pass from the conflict between systems of government, and come to the other conflict of ideas as to right and wrong, we find ourselves faced with an antagonism60 which is wholly incapable61 of accommodation. In this war the stakes are something more than any of the material interests involved. It is a conflict where one faith is pitted against another. No casuistry will reconcile the ideal which inspires English policy with the ideal which inspires German policy. There is no sense—nothing indeed but danger—in arguing round the circle to prove that the rulers of these two nations are victims of some frightful62 misunderstanding, and that really at the bottom of their hearts they believe the same things. This is entirely63 untrue: they believe quite different things; things indeed which are as nearly as possible opposites.
{174}
Our own belief is old, ingrained, and universal. It is accepted equally by the people and their rulers. We have held it so long that the articles of our creed64 have become somewhat blurred65 in outline—overgrown, like a memorial tablet, by moss66 and lichen67.
In the case of our enemy the tablet is new and the inscription68 sharp. He who runs may read it in bold clear-cut lettering. But the belief of the German people in the doctrine69 which has been carved upon the stone is not yet universal, or anything like universal. It is not even general. It is fully55 understood and accepted only in certain strata70 of society; but it is responsible, without a doubt, for the making in cold blood of the policy which has led to this war. When the hour struck which the German rulers deemed favourable for conquest, war, according to their creed, became the duty as well as the interest of the Fatherland.
But so soon as war had been declared, the German people were allowed and even encouraged to believe that the making of war from motives71 of self-interest was a crime against humanity—the Sin against the Holy Ghost. They were allowed and encouraged to believe that the Allies were guilty of this crime and sin. And not only this, but war itself, which had been hymned in so many professorial rhapsodies, as a noble and splendid restorer of vigour73 and virtue74, was now execrated75 with wailing76 and gnashing of teeth, as the most hideous77 of all human calamities78.
It is clear from all this that the greater part of the German people regarded war in exactly the same light as the whole of the English people did. In itself it was a curse; and the man who deliberately79 contrived80 it for his own ends, or even for those of his {175} country, was a criminal. The German people applied81 the same tests as we did, and it is not possible to doubt that in so doing they were perfectly82 sincere. They acted upon instinct. They had not learned the later doctrines83 of the pedantocracy, or how to steer84 by a new magnetic pole. They still held by the old Christian85 rules as to duties which exist between neighbours. To their simple old-fashioned loyalty86 what their Kaiser said must be the truth. And what their Kaiser said was that the Fatherland was attacked by treacherous87 foes88. That was enough to banish89 all doubts. For the common people that was the reality and the only reality. Phrases about world-power and will-to-power—supposing they had ever heard or noticed them—were only mouthfuls of strange words, such as preachers of all kinds love to chew in the intervals of their discourses90.
APOSTASY91 OF THE PRIESTHOOD
When the priests and prophets found themselves at last confronted by those very horrors which they had so often invoked92, did their new-found faith desert them, or was it only that their tongues, for some reason, refused to speak the old jargon93? Judging by their high-flown indignation against the Allies it would rather seem as if, in the day of wrath94, they had hastily abandoned sophistication for the pious95 memories of their unlettered childhood. Their apostasy was too well done to have been hypocrisy96.
With the rulers it was different. They knew clearly enough what they had done, what they were doing, and what they meant to do. When they remained sympathetically silent, amid the popular babble97 about the horrors of war and iniquity98 of peace-breakers, their tongues were not paralysed by remorse—they were merely in their cheeks. Their {176} sole concern was to humour public opinion, the results of whose disapproval99 they feared, quite as much as they despised its judgment100.
That war draws out and gives scope to some of the noblest human qualities, which in peace-time are apt to be hidden out of sight, no one will deny. That it is a great getter-rid of words and phrases, which have no real meaning behind them—that it is a great winnower101 of true men from shams102, of staunch men from boasters and blowers of their own trumpets—that it is a great binder-together of classes, a great purifier of the hearts of nations, there is no need to dispute. Occasionally, though very rarely, it has proved itself to be a great destroyer of misunderstanding between the combatants themselves.
But although the whole of this is true, it does not lighten the guilt72 of the deliberate peace-breaker. Many of the same benefits, though in a lesser103 degree, arise out of a pestilence104, a famine, or any other great national calamity105; and it is the acknowledged duty of man to strive to the uttermost against these and to ward them off with all his strength. It is the same with war. To argue, as German intellectuals have done of late, that in order to expand their territories they were justified106 in scattering107 infection and deliberately inviting108 this plague, that the plague itself was a thing greatly for the advantage of the moral sanitation109 of the world—all this is merely the casuistry of a priesthood whom the vanity of rubbing elbows with men of action has beguiled110 of their salvation111.
THE ARROGANCE112 OF PEDANTS113
Somewhere in one of his essays Emerson introduces an interlocutor whom he salutes114 as 'little Sir.' One feels tempted115 to personify the whole corporation of German pedants under the same title. When they {177} talk so vehemently116 and pompously117 about the duty of deliberate war-making for the expansion of the Fatherland, for the fulfilment of the theory of evolution, even for the glory of God on high, our minds are filled with wonder and a kind of pity.
Have they ever seen war except in their dreams, or a countryside in devastation118? Have they ever looked with their own eyes on shattered limbs, or faces defaced, of which cases, and the like, there are already some hundreds of thousands in the hospitals of Europe, and may be some millions before this war is ended? Have they ever reckoned—except in columns of numerals without human meaning—how many more hundreds of thousands, in the flower of their age, have died and will die, or—more to be pitied—will linger on maimed and impotent when the war is ended? Have they realised any of these things, except in diagrams, and curves, and statistical119 tables, dealing120 with the matter—as they would say themselves, in their own dull and dry fashion—'under its broader aspects'—in terms, that is, of population, food-supply, and economic output?
Death, and suffering of many sorts occur in all wars—even in the most humane121 war. And this is not a humane war which the pedants have let loose upon us. Indeed, they have taught with some emphasis that humanity, under such conditions, is altogether a mistake.
"Sentimentality!" cries the 'little Sir' impatiently, "sickly sentimentality! In a world of men such things must be. God has ordained122 war."
Possibly. But what one feels is that the making of war is the Lord's own business and not the 'little Sir's.' It is the Lord's, as vengeance123 is, and {178} earthquakes, floods, and droughts; not an office to be undertaken by mortals.
The 'little Sir,' however, has devised a new order for the world, and apparently124 he will never rest satisfied until Heaven itself conforms to his initiative. He is audacious, for like the Titans he has challenged Zeus. But at times we are inclined to wonder—is he not perhaps trying too much? Is he not in fact engaged in an attempt to outflank Providence125, whose pivot126 is infinity127? And for this he is relying solely128 upon the resources of his own active little finite mind. He presses his attack most gallantly129 against human nature—back and forwards, up and down—but opposing all his efforts is there not a screen of adamantine crystal which cannot be pierced, of interminable superficies which cannot be circumvented130? Is he not in some ways like a wasp131, which beats itself angrily against a pane132 of glass?
[1] Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Jay.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
discourse
|
|
| n.论文，演说；谈话；话语；vi.讲述，著述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
contentions
|
|
| n.竞争( contention的名词复数 )；争夺；争论；论点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
taunts
|
|
| 嘲弄的言语，嘲笑，奚落( taunt的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
rebound
|
|
| v.弹回；n.弹回，跳回 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
rankle
|
|
| v.（怨恨，失望等）难以释怀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
organisation
|
|
| n.组织，安排，团体，有机休 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
autocracy
|
|
| n.独裁政治，独裁政府 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
monarchy
|
|
| n.君主，最高统治者；君主政体，君主国 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
underlying
|
|
| adj.在下面的，含蓄的，潜在的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
flamboyant
|
|
| adj.火焰般的，华丽的，炫耀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
teemed
|
|
| v.充满( teem的过去式和过去分词 )；到处都是；（指水、雨等）暴降；倾注 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
patriotic
|
|
| adj.爱国的，有爱国心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
posterity
|
|
| n.后裔，子孙，后代 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
preservation
|
|
| n.保护，维护，保存，保留，保持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
aggression
|
|
| n.进攻，侵略，侵犯，侵害 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
bankruptcy
|
|
| n.破产；无偿付能力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
costly
|
|
| adj.昂贵的，价值高的，豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
arduous
|
|
| adj.艰苦的，费力的，陡峭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
creditors
|
|
| n.债权人，债主( creditor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
founders
|
|
| n.创始人( founder的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
abhorred
|
|
| v.憎恶( abhor的过去式和过去分词 )；（厌恶地）回避；拒绝；淘汰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
ward
|
|
| n.守卫，监护，病房，行政区，由监护人或法院保护的人（尤指儿童）；vt.守护，躲开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
intervals
|
|
| n.[军事]间隔( interval的名词复数 )；间隔时间；[数学]区间；（戏剧、电影或音乐会的）幕间休息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
chaos
|
|
| n.混乱，无秩序 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
stringent
|
|
| adj.严厉的；令人信服的；银根紧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
esteemed
|
|
| adj.受人尊敬的v.尊敬( esteem的过去式和过去分词 )；敬重；认为；以为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
degenerate
|
|
| v.退步，堕落；adj.退步的，堕落的；n.堕落者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
cringing
|
|
| adj.谄媚，奉承 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
terminology
|
|
| n.术语；专有名词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
slippers
|
|
| n. 拖鞋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
dreaded
|
|
| adj.令人畏惧的；害怕的v.害怕，恐惧，担心( dread的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
overdone
|
|
| v.做得过分( overdo的过去分词 )；太夸张；把…煮得太久；（工作等）过度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
purges
|
|
| 清除异己( purge的名词复数 )； 整肃（行动）； 清洗； 泻药 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
pessimism
|
|
| n.悲观者，悲观主义者，厌世者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
breach
|
|
| n.违反，不履行；破裂；vt.冲破，攻破 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
wilful
|
|
| adj.任性的，故意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
despondent
|
|
| adj.失望的，沮丧的，泄气的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
degradation
|
|
| n.降级；低落；退化；陵削；降解；衰变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
dearth
|
|
| n.缺乏，粮食不足，饥谨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
vile
|
|
| adj.卑鄙的，可耻的，邪恶的；坏透的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
exempt
|
|
| adj.免除的；v.使免除；n.免税者，被免除义务者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
bracing
|
|
| adj.令人振奋的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
miserably
|
|
| adv.痛苦地；悲惨地；糟糕地；极度地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
fortitude
|
|
| n.坚忍不拔；刚毅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
irreconcilable
|
|
| adj.（指人）难和解的，势不两立的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
oppositions
|
|
| （强烈的）反对( opposition的名词复数 )； 反对党； （事业、竞赛、游戏等的）对手； 对比 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
antagonism
|
|
| n.对抗，敌对，对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
frightful
|
|
| adj.可怕的；讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
creed
|
|
| n.信条；信念，纲领 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
blurred
|
|
| v.（使）变模糊( blur的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）难以区分；模模糊糊；迷离 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
moss
|
|
| n.苔，藓，地衣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
lichen
|
|
| n.地衣, 青苔 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
inscription
|
|
| n.（尤指石块上的）刻印文字，铭文，碑文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
motives
|
|
| n.动机，目的( motive的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
vigour
|
|
| （=vigor）n.智力，体力，精力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
execrated
|
|
| v.憎恶( execrate的过去式和过去分词 )；厌恶；诅咒；咒骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
wailing
|
|
| v.哭叫，哀号( wail的现在分词 )；沱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
hideous
|
|
| adj.丑陋的，可憎的，可怕的，恐怖的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
calamities
|
|
| n.灾祸，灾难( calamity的名词复数 )；不幸之事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
contrived
|
|
| adj.不自然的，做作的；虚构的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
steer
|
|
| vt.驾驶，为…操舵；引导；vi.驾驶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
treacherous
|
|
| adj.不可靠的，有暗藏的危险的；adj.背叛的，背信弃义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
foes
|
|
| 敌人，仇敌( foe的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
banish
|
|
| vt.放逐，驱逐；消除，排除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
discourses
|
|
| 论文( discourse的名词复数 )； 演说； 讲道； 话语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
apostasy
|
|
| n.背教，脱党 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
invoked
|
|
| v.援引( invoke的过去式和过去分词 )；行使（权利等）；祈求救助；恳求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
jargon
|
|
| n.术语，行话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
wrath
|
|
| n.愤怒，愤慨，暴怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
hypocrisy
|
|
| n.伪善，虚伪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
babble
|
|
| v.含糊不清地说，胡言乱语地说，儿语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
iniquity
|
|
| n.邪恶；不公正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
disapproval
|
|
| n.反对，不赞成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
winnower
|
|
| n.扬谷（或场）者，扬谷器，风车；扇车；簸谷机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
102
shams
|
|
| 假象( sham的名词复数 )； 假货； 虚假的行为（或感情、言语等）； 假装…的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
lesser
|
|
| adj.次要的，较小的；adv.较小地，较少地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
pestilence
|
|
| n.瘟疫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
calamity
|
|
| n.灾害，祸患，不幸事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
scattering
|
|
| n.[物]散射；散乱，分散；在媒介质中的散播adj.散乱的；分散在不同范围的；广泛扩散的；（选票）数量分散的v.散射(scatter的ing形式)；散布；驱散 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
inviting
|
|
| adj.诱人的，引人注目的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
sanitation
|
|
| n.公共卫生，环境卫生，卫生设备 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
beguiled
|
|
| v.欺骗( beguile的过去式和过去分词 )；使陶醉；使高兴；消磨（时间等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
salvation
|
|
| n.（尤指基督）救世，超度，拯救，解困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
arrogance
|
|
| n.傲慢，自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
pedants
|
|
| n.卖弄学问的人，学究，书呆子( pedant的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
salutes
|
|
| n.致敬，欢迎，敬礼( salute的名词复数 )v.欢迎，致敬( salute的第三人称单数 )；赞扬，赞颂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
vehemently
|
|
| adv. 热烈地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
pompously
|
|
| adv.傲慢地，盛大壮观地；大模大样 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
devastation
|
|
| n.毁坏；荒废；极度震惊或悲伤 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
statistical
|
|
| adj.统计的，统计学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
ordained
|
|
| v.任命（某人）为牧师( ordain的过去式和过去分词 )；授予（某人）圣职；（上帝、法律等）命令；判定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
vengeance
|
|
| n.报复，报仇，复仇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
pivot
|
|
| v.在枢轴上转动；装枢轴，枢轴；adj.枢轴的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
infinity
|
|
| n.无限，无穷，大量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
gallantly
|
|
| adv. 漂亮地，勇敢地，献殷勤地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
circumvented
|
|
| v.设法克服或避免（某事物），回避( circumvent的过去式和过去分词 )；绕过，绕行，绕道旅行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
wasp
|
|
| n.黄蜂，蚂蜂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
pane
|
|
| n.窗格玻璃，长方块 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |