Q16 of 33 Page 1

Examine the dramatic changes that took place in the party system in India during 1969 to 1977.

1. Since 1969, the Congress party had started shedding its character as an umbrella party which accommodated leaders and workers of different ideological dispensations and viewpoints.


2. The congress party claimed itself as the only socialist and pro poor party.


3. This led to success of congress party.


4. Other opposition parties relied more and more on what is known in Indian politics as ‘non-Congressism.


5. Indirect manner the issue of welfare of the backward castes also began to dominate politics since 1977.


More from this chapter

All 33 →
14

Highlight any four consequences of the partition of India in 1947.

 15

What distinguished the dominance of the Congress Party in India from the one-party dominance in other countries ? Explain.

 17

Study the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow :

The smaller states in the alliances used the link to the superpowers for their own purposes. They got the promise of protection, weapons and economic aid against their local rivals, mostly regional neighbors with whom they had rivalries. The alliance systems led by the two superpowers, therefore, threatened to divide the entire world into two camps. This division happened first in Europe. Most countries of Western Europe sided with the US and those of Eastern Europe joined the Soviet camp. That is why, these were also called the ‘western’ and the ‘eastern’ alliances.


(i) Name one organisation each related to the ‘western’ and the ‘eastern’ alliances.


(ii) Why were the smaller states interested in joining the super alliances?


(iii) How did the ‘alliance system’ threaten to divide the world?

 18

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?