Last visit was: 23 Dec 2024, 04:27 It is currently 23 Dec 2024, 04:27

Close

GRE Prep Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GRE score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30484
Own Kudos [?]: 36829 [4]
Given Kudos: 26100
Send PM
avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 19 May 2020
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 192 [2]
Given Kudos: 0
GRE 1: Q160 V163
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 May 2021
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 47 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Retired Moderator
Joined: 09 Jan 2021
Posts: 576
Own Kudos [?]: 846 [1]
Given Kudos: 194
GRE 1: Q167 V156
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Investment Banking)
Send PM
The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
1
aishumurali wrote:
I feel this statement is overly twisted , is there any way to understand the fact explained in this statement?


Hi There!

Let me try helping you!

Solved this in 7 mins with 3/4 correct.

The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civil rights movement and the movement protesting the war in Vietnam. Although they overlapped in time, they were largely distinct. For a brief moment in 1967, however, it appeared that the two movements might unite under the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr. King's role in the antiwar movement appears to require little explanation since he was the foremost advocate of nonviolence of his time. But King's stance on the Vietnam War cannot be explained in terms of pacifism alone. After all, he was something of a latecomer to the antiwar movement, even though by 1965 he was convinced that the role of the United States in the war was indefensible. Why then the two years that passed before he translated his private misgivings into public dissent? Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.

Focus on the highlighted parts. Picking up cues such as these helps to not get into detail, but still understand the whole picture.

The author says that there are two profound social moments- x & y. Although(there is some contrast) they overlapped in time, they were distinct. However(Double contrast) you know the author might say that although they were distinct they might be similar under MLK. And then the author explains the role as to why the movement united under MLK. Then again, this cannot be aptly explained, because MLK was a late comer in the movement and further delineates his view by asking and question and presents his view on the question.


Let me know if you need further help & I hope this helps!
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 May 2021
Posts: 146
Own Kudos [?]: 47 [0]
Given Kudos: 23
Send PM
Re: The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
Thank you for the fantastic summary . I will start practising summarising these passages more often . I forgot to post the sentence which i found to be twisted Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Jul 2019
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
what does this bolded part means in the sentence- "Why then the two years that passed before he translated his private misgivings into public dissent?"
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 30484
Own Kudos [?]: 36829 [0]
Given Kudos: 26100
Send PM
Re: The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
Expert Reply
DeepKapoor123 wrote:
what does this bolded part means in the sentence- "Why then the two years that passed before he translated his private misgivings into public dissent?"


misgivings=a feeling of doubt or suspicion

Two years before to say what he thought was wrong , saying it publicly

Regards
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Apr 2022
Posts: 17
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [1]
Given Kudos: 12
Send PM
Re: The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
1
aishumurali wrote:
Thank you for the fantastic summary . I will start practising summarising these passages more often . I forgot to post the sentence which i found to be twisted Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.


I am late to the party, but anyway here are my two cents. " This sentence explains why it took 2 years for MLK to support antiwar movement and goes like " if criticize the American policy then he might put Civil rights support in risk."

Anyway better version I got from CHAT GPT " This sentence suggests that a person (referred to as "he") believed that if he criticized American foreign policy, it would jeopardize the support he had received from the federal government for civil rights. In other words, the person may have believed that if he spoke out against American foreign policy, the government might withdraw its support for civil rights, which he had previously secured."
GRE Instructor
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 1066
Own Kudos [?]: 1432 [1]
Given Kudos: 24
Send PM
The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
1
17. According to the passage, the delay referred to is perhaps attributable to which of the following?

After all, he was something of a latecomer to the antiwar movement, even though by 1965 he was convinced that the role of the United States in the war was indefensible. Why then the two years that passed before he translated his private misgivings into public dissent? Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.


(A) King's ambivalence concerning the role of the United States in the war in Vietnam

No. He was convinced that the role of the United States was indefensible by 1965.

(B) King's attempts to consolidate support for his leadership within the civil rights movement

No. He was not attempting to consolidate support for his leadership. No evidence in the passage for it.

(C) King's desire to keep the leadership of the civil rights movement distinct from that of the antiwar movement

No. There is no evidence for this in the passage.

(D) King's desire to draw support for the civil rights movement from the leadership of the antiwar movement

No. There is no evidence for this in the passage.

(E) King's reluctance to jeopardize federal support for the civil rights movement

Yes.

Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.



18. The author supports the claim that "King's stance on the Vietnam War cannot be explained in terms of pacifism alone" by implying which of the following?

(A) There is little evidence that King was ever a student of pacifist doctrine.

No.

(B) King, despite pacifist sympathies, was not convinced that the policy of the federal government in Vietnam was wrong.

No. By 1965, he was convinced that the role of the United States in Vietnam was indefensible.

(C) King's belief in nonviolence was formulated in terms of domestic policy rather than in terms of international issues.

No.

(D) Had King's actions been based on pacifism alone, he would have joined the antiwar movement earlier than he actually did.

Yes.

The subsequent sentence - "After all, he was something of a latecomer to the antiwar movement, even though by 1965 he was convinced that the role of the United States in the war was indefensible." - is the proof.

(E) Opponents of United States foreign policy within the federal government convinced King of their need for support.

No.



19. Which of the following can be inferred from the passage about the movement opposing the war in Vietnam?

(A) It preceded the civil rights movement.

No.

(B) It began in 1965.

No.

(C) It was supported by many who otherwise opposed public dissent.

No.

(D) It drew support from most civil rights leaders.

No.

(E) It was well underway by 1967.

Yes.

For a brief moment in 1967, however, it appeared that the two movements might unite under the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr.



20. Which of the following best describes the passage?

(A) It discusses an apparent inconsistency and suggests a reason for it.

Yes.

Why then the two years that passed before he translated his private misgivings into public dissent? Perhaps he believed that he couldn't criticize American foreign policy without endangering the support for civil rights that he had won from the federal government.


(B) It outlines a sequence of historical events.

No.

(C) It shows why a commonly held view is inaccurate.

No.

(D) It evaluates an explanation and finally accepts that explanation.

No.

(E) It contrasts two views of an issue

No.
Prep Club for GRE Bot
The 1960's witnessed two profound social movements: the civi [#permalink]
Moderators:
GRE Forum Moderator
37 posts
GRE Instructor
234 posts
GRE Instructor
1066 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne