Short Answer TypeWhy does development have different meaning for different sections of the people.?
To an industrialist who is planning to set up a steel plant in a rural area, and at the same time to the Adivasi who lives in that region development means different because they lose their forest land.
Analyse the two political developments of 1940s that lead to the decision for the creation of Pakistan.
Match the following meaningfully from the names in Column ‘A’ with the information in Column ‘B’ :
How far did the Rajive Gandhi – Longowal Accord succeed in bringing normalcy in Punjab ?
What will happen if the regions are not given their due share in decision-making at the national level ?
What distinguished the dominance of the Congress Party in India from the one-party dominance in other countries ? Explain.
Examine the dramatic changes that took place in the party system in India during 1969 to 1977.
Study the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
The lack of genuine international support for democratic rule in Pakistan has further encouraged the military to continue its dominance. The United States and other Western countries have encouraged the military’s authoritarian rule in the past, for their own reasons. Given their fear of the threat of what they call ‘global Islamic terrorism’ and the
apprehension that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal might fall into the hands of these terrorist groups, the military regime in Pakistan has been seen as the protector of Western interests in West Asia and South Asia.
(i) What is meant by ‘global Islamic terrorism’ ?
(ii) Why did Pakistan lack genuine international support for democratic rule ?
(iii) Why was the military regime in Pakistan considered as the protector of Western
interests in West Asia and South Asia ?
Study the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
Critics of popular movement often argue that collective actions like strikes, sit-ins and rallies disrupt the functioning of the government, delay decision-making and destabilise the routines of democracy. Such an argument invites a deeper question: why do these movements resort to such assertive forms of action ? We have seen that popular movements have raised legitimate demands of the people and have involved large scale
participation of citizens. It should be noted that the groups mobilised by these movements
are poor, socially and economically disadvantaged sections of the society from marginal social groups.
(i) Popular movements resort to which two types of assertive actions ?
(ii) How far do you agree with the arguments given by the critics?
(iii) Why are groups involved in popular movements mostly from marginal social groups
Switch
