44.4.8 Insurgent political parties

Accounts Playable

I tend to miss these "fill in the blank" miscellaneous questions. I tend to categorize them as MSS or MP questions. Since that isn't really working (easily this question type is my lowest % according to the analytics) does anyone have any ideas about how to tackle these? The curriculum just had some listed questions, but no lesson about them.

For this question, during the timed exam and during BR, I thought all of the choices were equally awful (except for A, which was even more awful), so I pretty much randomly chose between B-E. Can someone justify B and eliminate the other answers? B seems pretty bad to me. It states that Stay in Power--->Victorious party must address the disagreements. However, the passage says they ignore their disagreements and that they come forward after victory. But, the passage (to me) doesn't imply that unaddressed disagreements trigger an overthrow. Sure, the passage starts by stating that the factions differ as much in ideology as the dominant party, but it doesn't create a sufficiency arrow for overthrowing that party (I think). Idk, this question had me spinning my wheels on the exam, and now I am spinning my wheels on it during BR.

nye8870

JYs explanation for this question was amazing. The reason (B) is the right answer is because the situation described in the first sentence holds for the current dominant party as well as whichever new party takes over. The party that takes over will then assume the role of “dominant” and become subject to the same problems that the former did. So…if the new party is to remain in power they are going to have to work out the stark differences between themselves and the other factions or they too will soon be toppled.

Accounts Playable

@nye8870

Thanks for the response! I still have an issue with the fact that the new dominant party (the insurgent party that is now in power) will not stay in power if it doesn't address the disagreements. Specifically, the correct answer choice states that Stay in Power---->Must address problems. But, to me that JY in the video is implying that Addressing problems---->Stay in power. I just don't see where the passage implies that addressing problems is sufficient or necessary for staying in power. The last sentence of the passage mentions that the ignored disagreements come forward after victory, but so what? Where does that imply that they need to be addressed in order to stay in power? Why can't you not address them and stay in power? To relate this idea back to the first sentence, the fact that the parties are dissatisfied is just a modifier of the type of party that is going to try to seize power. We don't know if this is the reason why they are doing so. What if they are dissatisfied with the current regime, but the reason they seize power is simply because they like bloodshed and war (I know this might be an odd ball example, but I don't see how it is any less supported).

nye8870

“justificatory ideology always produce factions *whose views and aims* differ *as greatly - from each other’s- as they do from the dominant party’s*” So I believe the stim is saying that if and when the dom-party is replaced, the other factions will resume their equally hardened beef (did I just say that?) with the new dom-party, so the cycle will continue…that is unless they can come to terms with each other.