[Annotated] The death of democracy and birth of an unknown beast

A book excerpt^[각주:1] and interview with David Runciman, author of "How Democracy Ends"

History provides uncomfortable lessons. Among them is that systems of governance are not immortal and that democracies can devolve into^[각주:2] autocracy^[각주:3]. As institutions decay^[각주:4] and social norms fray^[각주:5], democratic processes and practices are prone to^[각주:6] apathy^[각주:7], demagoguery^[각주:8] and disintegration^[각주:9]. 

One scholar ringing the loudest alarm bell - or perhaps death knell^[각주:10] - is David Runciman. He is a professor of politics at Cambridge University and the author of "How Democracy Ends". His replies are followed by an excerpt from the book. 

The Economist: Some argue that liberals only worry that democracy is in crisis when people start voting for ideas and candidates that they don't like. Why are they wrong?

David Runciman: Liberals invariably^[각주:11] think democracy is in crisis, given that there's always something for liberals to dislike about a system where the majority decides. What's different about now is not simply that the liberals are complaining because they are losing, but even the winners are behaving as though they are the victims. Democracy works best when we take it in turns to complain about the system^[각주:12]. Now all sides - pro- and anti-Trump, pro- and anti-Brexit - feel like they are being conned^[각주:13]. That kind of ecumenical^[각주:14] distrust is something new. 

The Economist: Democracy has always faced crises that hobbled it^[각주:15] - and forced it to change. Why do you think things are so bad now that it may spell the end^[각주:16]?

Mr Runciman: The crises are not the same today - in many ways their scale is wrong^[각주:17]. Some are too big and too remote^[각주:18] - systemic global economic risk, climate change, the coming of^[각주:19] intelligent machines are all challenges that can make individual citizens feel relatively powerless. At the same time, our experience of crisis tends to be increasingly personalized^[각주:20]. The crises that did most to galvanize democracy during^[각주:21] the last century were wars and the threat of wars - the struggle for national survival^[각주:22] meant we were all in it together. Twenty-first century crises too often reinforce our sense that we are all in it separately. 

The Economist: Facebook both undermines and bolster democracy^[각주:23]. Where do you come out on it?

Mr Runciman: The digital revolution has been simultaneously good and bad for democracy^[각주:24], and Facebook is no exception. The good is in the breadth^[각주:25] and the openness of the network. The bad is in the secrecy^[각주:26] and opacity of the way the network is run^[각주:27]. Facebook is a two-billion-strong democratic community and the personal plaything of^[각주:28] an unaccountable thirty-something billionaire^[각주:29]. If it comes down to^[각주:30] a contest between^[각주:31] the membership and the ownership of Facebook, Zuckerberg will probably win, as he gets to set the rules. In the end it is only the regulatory power of^[각주:32] the state that can make Facebook safe for democracy. 

The Economist: Shouldn't the benefits of liberal democracy be sufficiently^[각주:33] self-evident to^[각주:34] voters to make it invincible^[각주:35]?

Mr Runciman: The self-evidence is^[각주:36] part of the problem. Democracy has become something we take for granted^[각주:37], and so we tend to assume that it will continue to function no matter what we throw at it^[각주:38]. I suspect that one reason for Brexit and Trump is not that people have lost faith in^[각주:39] democracy but that many have the kind of unthinking faith in^[각주:40] it that allows them to believe it can survive anything. Far from making democracy invincible this sort of blithe confidence^[각주:41] makes it vulnerable: it gives us licence to indulge^[각주:42] our grievance^[각주:43] regardless of the consequences. 

The Economist: Democracy is only a means to an end^[각주:44]. Can a positive alternative replace it?

Mr Runciman: Yes, there must be alternatives, because it would be absurd to think that^[각주:45] the politics of the last hundred or so years is the way it's meant to be forever. Digital technology, though it has changed so much, has barely changed the way we do politics. That is still to come, and we may just be at the beginning of it. The risks are huge but so too is the possible upside^[각주:46]: technology could still set us free. The problem is how we get from here to there: the thing that stands in the way of a better politic 

Excerpt from "How Democracy Ends" (Profile Books, 2018), by David Runciman: 

A dystopia is only a bad dream, just as a utopia is a good one - these are places that don't actually exist. A world populated by immensely powerful, unthinking machines is^[각주:47] not a dream. We already live in it. We have done for a long time. It is the modern world. The question of how to live with these machines has always been at the heart of modern politics. 

Gandhi was far from alone in seeing Western democracy as dominated by the political machine. Max Weber, the great German sociologist who was Gandhi's contemporary^[각주:48], thought the same. The difference was that Weber recognized there was little we could do about it. He accepted that modern democracy was bound to be^[각주:49] thoroughly^[각주:50] mechanical^[각주:51]. Political parties were 'machines' - soulless^[각주:52] constructions^[각주:53] designed to withstand^[각주:54] the daily grind of^[각주:55] winning and holding power. Bureaucracy was 'an iron cage'. Unlike Gandhi, Weber could imagine no way for our societies to function without these vast, soulless structures. It made democratic politics as peculiarly^[각주:56] alienating business^[각주:57]. What gave us a voice was also what made us cogs in the machine^[각주:58]. That, for Weber, was the modern condition. 

Jeremy Bentham, the philosopher and democratic reformer who was writing a century before Weber and Gandhi, was mocked by his critics as a 'calculating machine^[각주:59]'. He seemed to have reduced politics to a search for the algorithm of human happiness. He wished to know which levers to pull. But Bentham was anything but heartless. He desperately wanted the politics of his time to work better: to be less cruel, less arbitrary^[각주:60] and more tolerant of human difference^[각주:61]. That meant democratizing it^[각주:62]. But it also meant making it more formulaic^[각주:63] in order to free it from prejudice. Bentham accepted that to humanize politics^[각주:64] you had to be willing to dehumanize it first^[각주:65]. 

Going even further back, the definitive image of modern politics is^[각주:66] a picture of a robot. It comes from the middle of the seventeenth century: In Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan (1651), the state is described as an 'automaton^[각주:67]', brought to life through^[각주:68] the principle of artificial motion. This robotic state does not think for itself^[각주:69]. It has no thoughts apart from the ones that^[각주:70] are given it by its component human parts. But if the structure is right, a modern state can turn human inputs into rational outcomes by stripping them of^[각주:71] their capacity to feed violent mistrust^[각주:72]. Hobbes's robot is meant to be scary: scary enough that any individual would think twice before^[각주:73] taking it on. But it is also meant to be reassuring^[각주:74]. The modern world is full of all sorts of machines. This is the machine that was created to master them for our benefit^[각주:75]. 

Hobbes understood that the state needed to be built in the image of the things it was trying to control. It had to look human, since if it could't control human beings it would be useless. But it also had to be machine-like^[각주:76]: a robot with a human face. This robot was needed to rescue us from our natural instincts. Left to their own devices, human beings were liable to^[각주:77] tear any political community to shreds^[각주:78]. For Hobbes that was one of the lessons of the ancient world: when politics is based on unmediated human interaction^[각주:79] it ends up as^[각주:80] a violent free-for-all^[각주:81]. All ancient states fell apart eventually^[각주:82]. Nothing so purely human is built to last. But a modern machine can be. 

However, there were two big risks with turning the state into a giant automaton. The first was that it wouldn't be powerful enough. Other artificial creatures that were more ruthless^[각주:83], more efficient, more robotic - and, by implication^[각주:84], less human - might turn out to be stronger. The second was that it would too closely resemble the things^[각주:85] it was designed to regulate. In a world of machines, the state might go native^[각주:86]. It could become entirely artificial. This is the original fear of the modern age^[각주:87]: not what happens when the machines become too much like us, but what happens if we become too much like machines. 

The machines that most frightened Hobbes^[각주:88] were corporations^[각주:89]. We have grown so used to living with corporations that we have stopped noticing how strange and machine-like they are. For Hobbes, they were another species of robot. They exist for our convenience, but they can acquire a life of their own^[각주:90]. A corporation is an unnatural assemblage of human beings^[각주:91], given artificial life in order to do their bidding^[각주:92]. The danger was that the humans would end up doing the corporation's bidding instead. 

Many of the things that we fret about when^[각주:93] we imagine a future world of AIs are the same worries that have been harboured about^[각주:94] corporations for centuries^[각주:95]. Corporations are man-made monsters^[각주:96]. They have no conscience^[각주:97] because they have no soul. They are able to live longer than people do. Some of them almost appear to be immortal^[각주:98]. Corporations, like robots, can emerge unscathed from^[각주:99] the wreckage of^[각주:100] human affairs^[각주:101]. During the first half of the twentieth century, German society underwent a near-death experience^[각주:102]. The scale of^[각주:103] the human destruction was mind-blowing^[각주:104]. Yet some German corporations came through it all^[각주:105] as if it had never happened. Some of the biggest German companies created in the nineteenth century are still among the biggest today - Allianz, Daimler, Deutsche Bank, Siemens. It is as though the madness of human beings is nothing to do with them^[각주:106]. 

At the same time^[각주:107], corporations are dispensable^[각주:108]. Some might live forever, but most of them have a very short shelf life. Humans create them and wind them up in the blink of an eye. Because they have no souls and no feelings, it doesn't matter. Some corporations are nothing but shells^[각주:109]. We proliferate them^[각주:110] unthinkingly^[각주:111]. They also proliferate themselves. Corporation spew out further corporations^[각주:112] - shells within shells - simply to make it hard for ordinary human beings to understand what they are up to. One of the nightmare scenarios for our robot future is what would happen if the robots could self-replicate^[각주:113]. We already have some idea of what that would be like - it's the corporate world. 

Hobbes believed that the only way to control corporations was to empower the artificial state^[각주:114]. he was right. Before the eighteenth century, states and corporations competed for territory and influence^[각주:115]. And there was no guarantee that the state would come out on top^[각주:116]. The East India Company outperformed^[각주:117] and outmatched the state in many parts of the world^[각주:118]. This corporation fought wars. It raised taxes^[각주:119]. On the back of these activities^[각주:120], it became enormously powerful as well as very wealthy. But as the modern state has grown in power^[각주:121] and authority^[각주:122], and particularly as it has democratized over the past two hundred years^[각주:123], it has asserted itself^[각주:124]. The East India Company was nationalized by the British state in^[각주:125] 1858. Roosevelt's trust-busting at^[각주:126] the start of the twentieth century, when he broke up the monopoly power of^[각주:127] America's largest corporations, was further testament to the new-found confidence of^[각주:128] the democratic state. Yet it wasn't really Roosevelt who did it. It was Roosevelt as the human face of^[각주:129] the vast American political machine^[각주:130]. This was the Leviathan^[각주:131] in action^[각주:132]. 

Weber was right: modern democracy can't escape the machine. What Gandhi sought in that regard was utopian. But the democratic machine can help to humanize the artificial modern world^[각주:133]. This has long been a part of the promise of democratic politics. Until now, the promise has been largely kept^[각주:134]. 

A common complaint against^[각주:135] twenty-first century democracy is that it has lost control of corporate power^[각주:136]. Big companies hoard wealth and influence^[각주:137]. They fuel inequality^[각주:138]. They despoil the planet^[각주:139]. They don't pay their taxes. For many corporations these kinds of complaints come with the territory^[각주:140] - banks and oil companies have heard them all before. But banks and oil companies are no longer the world's most powerful corporations. That mantle has passed to the technology giants^[각주:141]: Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple. These companies are young and fresh-faced^[각주:142]. They believe that what they are doing is good. They are not used to being loathed^[각주:143]. The state is not sure how to deal with monsters like these. 

1. excerpt ; [명사] ~ (from sth) (글·음악·영화 등의) 발췌[인용] (부분) ;; 미국식 [-sɜːrpt] 영국식 [ˈeksɜːpt] [본문으로]
2. devolve ; [자동사] 1. (의무·관직 따위가) …에게 넘어가다, 돌아가다[on, upon]; (토지·재산 따위가) …의 소유가 되다[to]. [본문으로]
3. autocracy ; (pl. -ies) (aut·archy) 1. [U] 전제[독재] 정치 ;; 2. [C] 전제 군주국, 독재 국가 ;; 미국식 [ɔːˈtɑːk-] 영국식 [ɔːˈtɒkrəsi] ;; [NOUN] Autocracy is government or control by one person who has complete power. [본문으로]
4. decay ; [자동사] 3. [자동사][V] (권력영향력 등이) 쇠퇴[퇴조]하다 ;; decline, deteriorate [본문으로]
5. fray ; [자동사] 1. 닳아 해지다, 풀리다 ;; [VERB] If something such as cloth or rope frays, or if something frays it, its threads or fibres start to come apart from each other and spoil its appearance. [본문으로]
6. be prone to ; ~하기 쉽다 [본문으로]
7. apathy ; [U] 무관심 ;; [NOUN] You can use apathy to talk about someone's state of mind if you are criticizing them because they do not seem to be interested in or enthusiastic about anything. ;; 미국∙영국 [ˈæpəθi] [본문으로]
8. demagoguery ; [U] 민중 선동, 악선전 ;; [NOUN] the methods, practices, or rhetoric of a demagogue ;; 미국식 [déməɡɑ̀ɡəri,-ɡɔ́:ɡ-] 영국식 [-ɡɔ́ɡ-] [본문으로]
9. disintegration ; [UC] 분해, 붕괴, 분열, 분산; [물리] (방사성 원소의) 붕괴; [지질] 풍화 작용 [본문으로]
10. death knell ; [명사] (…의) 종말을 알리는 사건[종말의 전조] ;; [NOUN] If you say that something sounds the death knell for a particular person or thing, you mean it will cause that person or thing to fail, end, or cease to exist. [본문으로]
11. invariably ; [부사] 변함[예외]없이, 언제나 ; 유의어 without fail ;; [ADV] If something invariably happens or is invariably true, it always happens or is always true. [본문으로]
12. take it in turns ; (영국) (…을) 교대로 하다[to do] [본문으로]
13. con ; [타동사][VN] (-nn-) ~ sb (into doing sth/out of sth) (비격식) 사기를 치다 [본문으로]
14. ecumenical ; 1. 전반적인, 보편적인, 세계적인. 2. 전기독교 교회의[를 대표하는](*오늘날에는 Roman Catholic Church에만 쓴다). ;; 3. (초교파적인) 세계 교회주의의. (또는 ecumenic, oecumenic(al)) ;; 미국∙영국 [ˌiːkjuːˈmenɪkl; ˌekjuː-] [본문으로]
15. hobble ; 2. 방해하다, 난처하게 하다(hinder, embarrass). [본문으로]
16. spell the end ; 종말을 가져오다 [본문으로]
17. scale ; 1. [sing., U] ~ (of sth) (특히 다른 것과 비교해서 본) 규모[범위] ; 참조 full-scale, large-scale, small-scale [본문으로]
18. remote ; 2. [명사 앞에만 씀] (시간상으로) 먼 유의어 distant ;; 7. [특히 최상급으로] 희미한, 미미한(slight); 여간해서 일어날 것 같지 않은 [본문으로]
19. coming ; [명사] the ~ of sth (새로운 것의) 시작, 도래 [본문으로]
20. personalize ; 3. [타동사] (일반적인 문제를 논의하면서) 개인적인 것으로 국한시키다[개인화하다] [본문으로]
21. galvanize (英 또한 -ise) ; (의학) <근육·신경에> 직류 전기 요법을 쓰다 ;; 3. 갑자기 활기를 띠게 하다[기운이 나게 하다]; <사람을> 격려하여 (어떤 행동을) 하게 하다 ((to, into)) [본문으로]
22. national survival ; (군사) 국가의 생존 [본문으로]
23. bolster ; [타동사][VN] ~ sth (up) 북돋우다, 강화[개선]하다 [본문으로]
24. simultaneously ; [부사] 동시에 ((with)); 일제히 [본문으로]
25. breadth ; 4. (breadths) (토지·수면 따위의) 넓이; [U](지식·경험 따위의) 폭, 범위(extent). [본문으로]
26. secrecy ; [U] 비밀 유지[엄수]; 비밀(인 상태) ;; 미국∙영국 [ˈsiːkrəsi] [본문으로]
27. opacity ; 2. (격식) (말·태도 등이) 불투명함[불분명함] ; 반의어 transparency ;; 미국식 [oʊ-] 영국식 [əʊˈpæsəti] ;; [NOUN] Opacity is the quality of being difficult to see through. [본문으로]
28. plaything ; 1. 노리개(장난감처럼 가지고 노는 사람·물건) [본문으로]
29. unaccountable ; 2. 책임을 지지 않는, 책임이 없는[for]; 제어(制御)를 받지 않는. [본문으로]
30. come down to ; 결국 ~이 되다, ~에 이르다 [본문으로]
31. contest ; 1. 경쟁, 겨루기, 경기, 경연, 콘테스트; 다툼, 항쟁, 싸움(struggle) ;; 2. 논쟁, 논전(dispute) [본문으로]
32. regulatory power ; 통제, 규제력 [본문으로]
33. sufficiently ; [부사] 충분히, (…하기에) 충분할 만큼 ((to do)) [본문으로]
34. self-evident ; [형용사] 자명한, 따로 증명[설명]할 필요가 없는 ; [ADJ] A fact or situation that is self-evident is so obvious that there is no need for proof or explanation. [본문으로]
35. invincible ; [형용사] 천하무적의, 아무도 꺾을[바꿀] 수 없는 ; 유의어 unconquerable [본문으로]
36. self-evidence ; [명사] 자명함. [본문으로]
37. take (sth/sb) for granted ; [동사] 당연한 일로 여기다; 대수롭지 않게 여기다. ; 유의어 accept without question; treat with careless indifference. [본문으로]
38. throw (sth) at (sb) ; (개 따위가) 무섭게 달려들다; (남을) 조롱하다, 바보 취급하다 [본문으로]
39. lose faith in ; …을 신뢰하는 마음을 잃다 [본문으로]
40. unthinking ; [형용사] (격식) 생각이 없는, 무모한, 경솔한 ; 유의어 thoughtless [본문으로]
41. blithe ; [주로 명사 앞에 씀] 1. (못마땅함) (하는 일에 대해) 태평스러운 ;; 2. (문예체) 쾌활한, 행복한 ;; 미국∙영국 [blaɪð] [본문으로]
42. indulge ; 3. [타동사][VN] ~ sb (with sth) | ~ sth …가 제멋대로 하게[갖고 싶은 대로 갖게] 하다; (응석·변덕 등을) 다 받아 주다 [본문으로]
43. grievance ; (특히 부당 취급에 대한) 불평 거리, 불만의 원인 ((against)); 불평(의 호소) [본문으로]
44. a means to an end ; 목적[원하는 것]을 위한 수단 ;; a thing you do only in order to achieve or obtain something else [본문으로]
45. absurd ; [형용사] 우스꽝스러운, 터무니없는 ; 유의어 ridiculous [본문으로]
46. upside ; [sing.] (전반적으로 나쁜 상황의 비교적) 괜찮은[긍정적인] 면 ; 반의어 downside [본문으로]
47. populate ; 1. (어떤 나라·도시 등에) 거주하다(inhabit), (나라·도시 따위의) 인구를 형성하다. ;; 2. (나라·도시 등에) 주민을 거주하게 하다, 식민(植民)하다(people). ;; [VERB] If an area is populated by certain people or animals, those people or animals live there, often in large numbers. ;; 참고 people [타동사][VN] [주로 수동태로] ~ sth (with sth) …에 살다; …을 …으로 가득 채우다 [본문으로]
48. contemporary ; (pl. -rar·ies[-z]) 1. (…와) 같은 시대[시기]의 사람[of]. ;; 2. (…와) 같은 나이[동년배]의 사람. [본문으로]
49. be bound to do ; 반드시 …하다; 《미국·구어》 …하려고 마음 먹다 ;; 참고 tend to [본문으로]
50. thoroughly ; 1. 대단히; 완전히 ;; 2. 철저히, 철두철미하게 [본문으로]
51. mechanical ; 3. (못마땅함) (사람의 행동이) 기계적인 ; 유의어 routine [본문으로]
52. soulless ; 1. (사물·장소가) 마음을 끄는 데가 없는, 삭막한 ; 유의어 depressing [본문으로]
53. construction ; 3. [C] (격식) 건축[구조]물 [본문으로]
54. withstand ; [타동사][VN] (with·stood, with·stood[-ˈstʊd]) (격식) 견뎌[이겨] 내다 ; 유의어 resist, stand up to [본문으로]
55. daily grind ; (구어) 판에 박힌 매일의 지루한 일 [본문으로]
56. peculiarly ; 1. 아주, 특히 ; 유의어 particularly, especially ;; 2. 독특하게 ; 유의어 uniquely ;; 3. 이상하게, 유별나게 [본문으로]
57. alienate ; 1. [타동사] (사람을) 소원하게[멀어지게] 만들다 [본문으로]
58. cog ; (톱니바퀴의) 톱니; 톱니바퀴(cogwheel); 《구어》 큰 조직 속의 하찮은 일원. ;; 미국식 [kɑːɡ] 영국식 [kɒɡ] [본문으로]
59. calculating ; [형용사] (못마땅함) 타산적인, 계산적인 ;; [ADJ] If you describe someone as calculating, you disapprove of the fact that they deliberately plan to get what they want, often by hurting or harming other people. [본문으로]
60. arbitrary ; 1. (행동·결정·법칙 등이) 임의적인, 제멋대로인 ;; 2. (격식) 전횡을 일삼는, 독단적인 ;; 미국식 [ˈɑːrbətreri] 영국식 [ˈɑːbɪtrəri; ˈɑːbɪtri] [본문으로]
61. be tolerant of ; …을 견뎌 내다, …을 관용하다 ;; ~에 관대하다 [본문으로]
62. democratize (英 또한 -ise)) ; [타동사][VN] (격식) 민주화하다 ;; 미국식 [-ˈmɑːk-] 영국식 [dɪˈmɒkrətaɪz] [본문으로]
63. formulaic ; (격식) 정형화된 ;; [ADJ] If you describe a way of saying or doing something as formulaic, you are criticizing it because it is not original and has been used many times before in similar situations. [본문으로]
64. humanize ; [타동사][VN] 인간답게 만들다; 인도적이 되게 하다 ;; [VERB] If you humanize a situation or condition, you improve it by changing it in a way which makes it more suitable and pleasant for people. [본문으로]
65. dehumanize ; [타동사][VN] 인간성을 말살시키다, 비인간적으로 만들다 ;; [VERB] If you say that something dehumanizes people, you mean it takes away from them good human qualities such as kindness, generosity, and independence. [본문으로]
66. definitive ; 2. [주로 명사 앞에 씀] 최고의, 거의 완벽한 [본문으로]
67. automaton ; (pl. au·toma·tons 또는 au·tom·ata[-tə]) 1. 로봇 같은 사람 ; 유의어 robot ;; 2. 자동 장치; 작은 로봇 [본문으로]
68. be brought to life ; 생명을 얻다. [본문으로]
69. think for oneself ; 1. 혼자서 생각하다, 제 마음대로 판단하다 ;; 2. 자주성이 있다, 독립심이 있다 [본문으로]
70. apart from (aˈside from특히 美) ; [전치사] 1. …외에는, …을 제외하고 [본문으로]
71. strip sb/sth of sth ; to take away a right, property, etc. that somebody has, as a punishment [본문으로]
72. mistrust ; [U] (종종 a mistrust) (…에 대한) 불신(용), 의심, 의혹[of, in]. ; 유의어 DOUBT [본문으로]
73. think twice ; 1. 재고하다, 숙고하다 ;; 2. 망설이다 [본문으로]
74. reassuring ; [형용사] 안심시키는, 걱정[불안감]을 없애 주는 [본문으로]
75. master ; master ; 1. [타동사] …을 완전히 익히다, …에 숙달[통달]하다 [본문으로]
76. machinelike ; [형용사] 기계 같은, 기계적인; <행동이> 정확한, 규칙적인; <생산이> 규격에 맞는 [본문으로]
77. liable ; [형용사][명사 앞에는 안 씀] 2. ~ to do sth ~하기 쉬운; ~할 것 같은 [본문으로]
78. tear somebody/something apart, to shreds, to bits, etc. ;; ~을 완전히 쳐부수다; ~를 마구 헐뜯다[혹평하다] [본문으로]
79. unmediated ; not mediated : not communicated or transformed by an intervening agency [본문으로]
80. end up as ; 결국 …이 되다. [본문으로]
81. free-for-all ; [sing.] 1. (모두가 자기 이익만을 위해서 싸우는) 무질서[혼란] 상태, 무한 경쟁 ;; 2. 난투극 ;; [NOUN] A free-for-all is a situation in which several people or groups are trying to get something for themselves and there are no controls on how they do it. [본문으로]
82. fall apart ; 1.to be old or in bad condition and break or break into pieces ;; 2.to have so many problems that it is no longer possible to exist or operate [본문으로]
83. ruthless ; [형용사] (못마땅함) 사람·행동이 무자비한, 가차 없는, 인정사정없는 ;; [ADJ] [oft ADJ in n] If you say that someone is ruthless, you mean that you disapprove of them because they are very harsh or cruel, and will do anything that is necessary to achieve what they want. [본문으로]
84. by implication ; 넌지시, 언외(言外)에, 함축적으로 ;; 암묵리에 [본문으로]
85. resemble ; [타동사][VN] [수동태로는 안 씀, 진행형으로는 쓰이지 않음] 닮다, 비슷[유사]하다 [본문으로]
86. go native ; (흔히 유머) 외국에서 머무는 사람이 현지인[토착민]들처럼 살려고[행동하려고] 하다 ;; try to live and behave like the local people [본문으로]
87. modern age ; [명사] 현대 [본문으로]
88. frighten ; [타동사] 1. 무섭게 하다, …의 간담을 서늘하게 하다, 깜짝 놀라게 하다(make suddenly afraid, scare). [본문으로]
89. corporation ; 1. (약어:Corp.) (큰 규모의) 기업[회사] ;; 2. 법인, 조합 [본문으로]
90. have a life of one's own ; 대단히 두드러지다, 눈에 띄다 [본문으로]
91. assemblage ; [명사] (격식, 전문 용어) 집합(체), 모임 ;; [NOUN] An assemblage of people or things is a collection of them. ;; 미국∙영국 [əˈsemblɪdʒ] [본문으로]
92. do someone's bidding ; ~의 명령, 분부대로 하다 [본문으로]
93. fret about ; …에 대해 초조해하다. [본문으로]
94. harbour ; 2. [타동사] (특히 좋지 않은 감정을 오랫동안 마음속에) 품다 ;; [VERB] If you harbour an emotion, thought, or secret, you have it in your mind over a long period of time. [본문으로]
95. for centuries ; 수 세기 동안 [본문으로]
96. man-made ; [형용사] 사람이 만든, 인공[인조/합성]의 ; 유의어 artificial [본문으로]
97. have no conscience ; 양심이 없다(어떠한 나쁜 일도 개의치 않는). [본문으로]
98. immortal ; [형용사] 1. 죽지 않는 ; 반의어 mortal [본문으로]
99. emerge unscathed ; 다치지 않고 빠져 나오다. [본문으로]
100. wreckage ; [U] 난파 화물, 표착물; 잔해, 파편 [본문으로]
101. human affairs[issues] ; 인사(人事) [본문으로]
102. near-death experience ; 죽음과 가까운 경험, 죽었다가 살아난 경험 ; [명사] 근사(近死)[임사(臨死)] 체험 [본문으로]
103. scale ; 1. [sing., U] ~ (of sth) (특히 다른 것과 비교해서 본) 규모[범위] ; 참조 full-scale, large-scale, small-scale [본문으로]
104. mind-blowing ; [형용사] (비격식) 너무나 신나는[감동적인/놀라운] ; [ADJ] If you describe something as mind-blowing, you mean that it is extremely impressive or surprising. [본문으로]
105. come through sth ; 2.to get better after a serious illness; to avoid serious injury or damage ;; 4.to pass from one stage of a competition to the next; to be successful in a test or an exam [본문으로]
106. be/have nothing to do with sb/sth ; ~와 아무 관련이 없다 ;; 1.have no connection with somebody/something ;; 2.avoid or refuse contact with somebody/something [본문으로]
107. at the same time ; 1. 동시에[함께] ;; 2. (고려해야 할 대조적인 사실 등을 언급할 때 써서) 그와 동시에 [본문으로]
108. dispensable ; [대개 명사 앞에는 안 씀] 없어도 되는, 불필요한 ; 반의어 essential, indispensable ;; [ADJ] If someone or something is dispensable they are not really needed. [본문으로]
109. shelf life ; [명사] (식품 등의) 유통 기한 ;; [NOUN] The shelf life of a product, especially food, is the length of time that it can be kept in a shop or at home before it becomes too old to sell or use. [본문으로]
110. proliferate ; [자, 타동사] 2. 급격히 증가하다[시키다] [본문으로]
111. unthinkably ; [부사] 생각할 수 없게; 있을 수 없게. [본문으로]
112. spew ;[자, 타동사] 1. (음식을) 토하다, 게우다(vomit, eject). ;; 2. (일반적으로) 뱉어내다, 뿜어내다(eject, pour forth). [본문으로]
113. self-replicate ; [자동사] (of a computer virus, etc) to reproduce itself [본문으로]
114. empower ; 1. (법률상) …에게 권능[권한]을 부여하다, …할 권력을 위임하다(authorize) ;; 2. …할 수 있도록 하다(enable), …할 능력[자격]을 주다, (…할 것을) …에게 허용하다 ;; [VERB] If someone is empowered to do something, they have the authority or power to do it. [본문으로]
115. compete (with somebody) for ; …을 위해 (…와) 싸우다. [본문으로]
116. come out on top (of sth) ; (시합·논쟁 등에서) 이기다 ;; 발군(拔群)하다. ;; become, etc. more successful than others [본문으로]
117. outperform ; [VERB] If one thing outperforms another, the first is more successful or efficient than the second. [본문으로]
118. outmatch ; [타동사] …보다 낫다, …보다 한 수 위이다 [본문으로]
119. raise taxes ; 세율을 올리다, 증세하다. [본문으로]
120. on the back of ; (업적·성공)의 결과로, ~의 뒤를 이어 [본문으로]
121. in power ; 권력의 자리에 있는, 정권을 쥐고 있는. [본문으로]
122. in authority ; 권한을 갖고 있는. [본문으로]
123. democratize ; 민주[평민]화하다, 민주[평민]적으로 하다. [본문으로]
124. assert ; 3. [[~ oneself로]] ;; 3-a. 의견[권리]을 주장하다; 고집하다, 주제넘게 나서다 ;; 3-b. <천성 등이> 나타나다; <사물이> 저절로 밝혀지다 [본문으로]
125. nationalize ; [타동사][VN] (산업·기업을) 국영[국유]화하다 ; 반의어 denationalize, privatize [본문으로]
126. trust-busting ; (미) 반(反)트러스트의 공소(公訴)[정치 운동] [본문으로]
127. break (sth) up ; 1. ~을 부수다[나누다/분해하다] ;; 2. (관계 등을) 끝내다 참조 break-up ;; 3. (무력으로) 못하게 하다[해산시키다] [본문으로]
128. new-found ; [형용사] (명사 앞에만 씀) 새로 발견된[얻은] ;; 미국식 [ˌnuː ˈfaʊnd] 영국식 [ˌnjuː ˈfaʊnd] [본문으로]
129. the human face of ; (어떤 주제·쟁점 등을) 사람 냄새가 나게[현실적으로 느끼게] 해 주는 사람 [본문으로]
130. political machine ; [명사] 정당[정치] 조직(선거에서 득표를 위해 유권자의 요구를 수용·추진하는 정당의 하부 조직). ; 유의어 party machine. [본문으로]
131. leviathan ; 1. 레비아단(성서에 나오는 바다 속 괴물) ;; 2. (문예체) (강력하고) 거대한 것 ;; [NOUN] A leviathan is something which is extremely large and difficult to control, and which you find rather frightening. ;; 미국∙영국 [ləˈvaɪəθən] [본문으로]
132. in action ; (제 고유의) 활동[작동]을 하는 ; working, operating, etc.; doing a particular activity [본문으로]
133. humanize ; [타동사][VN] 인간답게 만들다; 인도적이 되게 하다 ;; [VERB] If you humanize a situation or condition, you improve it by changing it in a way which makes it more suitable and pleasant for people. [본문으로]
134. largely ; [부사] 크게, 대체로, 주로 ;; [ADV] [ADV with v, ADV with cl/group] You use largely to say that a statement is not completely true but is mostly true. [본문으로]
135. a complaint against ; …에 대한 항의, 불만 [본문으로]
136. lose control of ; …을 제어할 수 없게 되다 [본문으로]
137. hoard ; [자, 타동사][V, VN] (특히 비밀리에 많은 돈식품귀중품 등을) 비축[저장]하다 ;; [VERB] If you hoard things such as food or money, you save or store them, often in secret, because they are valuable or important to you. [본문으로]
138. fuel ; (fuels[-z]; -l-, 《英》 -ll-) 2. …에 활기를 불어넣다, 부채질하다; 지지하다, 자극하다. ;; [본문으로]
139. despoil ; [타동사][VN] ~ sth (of sth) (문예체) (어떤 장소에서 귀중한 것을) 빼앗다[훼손하다] ;; [VERB] To despoil a place means to make it less attractive, valuable, or important by taking things away from it or by destroying it. [본문으로]
140. come/go with the territory ;; (특정한 직장·상황 등에서는) 보통이다[일상적인 일이다] ;; be a normal and accepted part of a particular job, situation, etc [본문으로]
141. mantle ; 1. [sing.] the ~ of sb/sth (문예체) (특히 남에게 물려주게 되는 중요한) ~의 역할[책임] ;; [NOUN] [the N of n] If you take on the mantle of something such as a profession or an important job, you take on the responsibilities and duties which must be fulfilled by anyone who has this profession or job. [본문으로]
142. fresh-faced ; [형용사] (얼굴이) 어리고 건강한, 동안의 ;; 건강하고 얼굴이 젊어 보이는; 젊고 팔팔한. [본문으로]
143. loathe ; 몹시 싫어하다; 지긋지긋하도록 싫다; 지겨워하다, 질색하다 ;; HELP ; dislike, hate, abhor보다 뜻이 강한 말. ;; 미국식 [loʊð] 영국식 [ləʊð] [본문으로]