Grounded in the chapter’s first outcome section.
Regular elections make rulers answerable to citizens and allow peaceful removal. Public debate, opposition, courts, legislatures and laws such as the Right to Information require governments to explain decisions and follow procedures. Democratic decision-making may be slower because it involves consultation, but it is more likely to consider public needs and correct mistakes. A government chosen through accepted constitutional rules gains legitimacy: even when people criticise particular decisions, they recognise their right to participate and the authority of the elected system.
Grounded in ‘Accommodation of social diversity’.
Majority rule must not become permanent rule by one religious, ethnic or linguistic group; majorities should be formed through changing issues and alliances. Governments must respect minority voices and provide legal and institutional ways to share power. Citizens need equal rights and freedom to express identity, while groups must accept constitutional methods rather than exclusion or violence. Accommodation works when differences are recognised and negotiated within a common democratic framework.
Each judgment applies the chapter’s findings on growth, inequality and social conflict.
The first claim is false: the chapter finds no necessary trade-off between democracy and development, and dictatorship does not guarantee growth or fair distribution. The second is partly supported by present evidence—democracies have often failed to reduce income inequality—but this is a failure to address through policy, not a fixed impossibility. The third should be opposed because health, education and poverty reduction build human capacity and are themselves development; infrastructure spending need not replace them. The fourth is false: equal votes establish political equality but do not automatically remove social hierarchy, economic domination or conflict. Democracy provides peaceful tools to challenge these inequalities.
The answer identifies social, economic and accountability challenges and links each to a mechanism.
The temple case reveals caste discrimination despite formal equality; anti-discrimination law, local monitoring and representation of Dalits in temple management can make equal access effective. Farmer suicides reveal economic distress and weak responsiveness; affordable institutional credit, crop insurance, fair prices, counselling and accountable rural support are needed. The alleged fake encounter raises police abuse and impunity; an independent, time-bound investigation, judicial oversight, witness protection and public findings can enforce accountability. Each case requires institutions that turn constitutional rights into practical equality and control over state power.
- A.. conflicts among people
- B.. economic inequalities among people
- C.. differences of opinion about how marginalised sections are to be treated
- D.. the idea of political inequality
Democracy establishes equal political status through citizenship and voting, while conflict and social-economic inequalities persist.
D. the idea of political inequality
- A.. free and fair elections
- B.. dignity of the individual
- C.. majority rule
- D.. equal treatment before law
Simple majority rule can become domination; democracy requires majority decisions constrained by rights, equality and accommodation.
C. majority rule
- A.. democracy and development go together.
- B.. inequalities exist in democracies.
- C.. inequalities do not exist under dictatorship.
- D.. dictatorship is better than democracy.
Democratic political equality has not automatically eliminated social and economic inequality.
B. inequalities exist in democracies.
The first two parts are directly evidenced; the final part is a sample response to the family prompt.
Nannu’s case shows that information rights can turn a passive applicant into a citizen able to demand accountability. His RTI questions created a written trail identifying responsible officials and possible consequences for delay. The office that ignored him for months completed the ration card within a week, treated him respectfully and asked him to withdraw the request, indicating that transparency changed official incentives. A model family comparison might note that applications often move faster when receipts, deadlines, grievance portals or RTI requests make responsibility traceable. The example shows how democratic institutions become responsive when citizens actively use them.