Question

In a controversial decision, the Supreme Court, by the closest possible margin of a 5-to-4 vote, held that a person has a right to express disagreement with governmental policies by burning the American flag. In a decision at least as controversial, the leadership of the People's Republic of China decided that citizens who peacefully express disagreement with government policies may be slaughtered. On the surface, these two events may seem to bear little relationship to one another, but deep and fundamental lessons can be drawn from their comparison.

How does Allan's use of the word "slaughtered" instead of "killed" reveal his attitude toward the subject?

A. Neutral
B. Critical
C. Supportive
D. Indifferent

Answer 1

Allan's use of the word 'slaughtered' exemplifies a critical attitude toward the harsh repression of peaceful protest in the People's Republic of China, contrasting it with the US Supreme Court's protection of symbolic speech like flag burning.

Step-by-step explanation:

Comparing the use of the word "slaughtered" instead of "killed" indicates Allan's critical attitude towards the subject matter. The term "slaughtered" suggests a brutal and inhumane action, one that is deeply negative and indicative of Allan's disapproval or condemnation of the event in the People's Republic of China. In contrast, the term "killed" is more neutral and would convey less of the emotion and critical judgement that "slaughtered" does. The way Allan presents these two events reflects his perspective on the right to express disagreement with government policies, juxtaposing the Supreme Court's protection of symbolic speech, like flag burning, with a government's harsh repression of peaceful protest.