Answer:

Statement 1: If political parties start competing in terms of some existing social divisions, it can lead to conflict or violence in the country.

Explanation:
When political parties start competing in terms of existing social divisions, it means that they are trying to gain support from different social groups by exploiting the divisions that already exist in society. This can lead to conflict or violence in the country due to the following reasons:

1. Polarization: When political parties compete based on social divisions, it often leads to the polarization of society. People are divided into different groups based on religion, caste, ethnicity, or other social identities. This can lead to animosity between different groups and result in conflicts.

2. Identity Politics: Political parties may use identity politics to mobilize support from specific social groups. They may appeal to the emotions and grievances of these groups, which can further deepen the divisions in society. This can create an "us versus them" mentality and fuel conflict.

3. Marginalization: Competing on social divisions can lead to the marginalization of certain groups. Political parties may prioritize the interests of one group over others, resulting in the exclusion and oppression of marginalized groups. This can breed resentment and lead to conflicts between different sections of society.

4. Violence and Aggression: When political parties exploit social divisions, it can incite violence and aggression. Supporters of different parties may engage in physical confrontations, riots, or other forms of violence to assert their group's dominance. This not only threatens public safety but also undermines the democratic fabric of the country.

Therefore, statement 1 is correct as political parties competing on existing social divisions can indeed lead to conflict or violence in the country.

Statement 2: Social divisions affect voting patterns in most countries.

Explanation:
Social divisions, such as religion, caste, ethnicity, language, or socio-economic status, often influence voting patterns in most countries. This can be explained by the following points:

1. Identity-based Voting: People often vote for candidates or parties that they perceive to represent their social identity or group interests. For example, voters from a particular caste may vote for a candidate who belongs to the same caste or is seen as representing their caste's interests.

2. Mobilization: Political parties often mobilize support by appealing to specific social divisions. They may use factors like religion, language, or ethnicity to gain the support of particular communities. This can influence voting patterns as people tend to vote for the party that they perceive as representing their community's interests.

3. Socialization: Social divisions can also influence voting patterns through the process of socialization. People's political attitudes and preferences are often shaped by their social background, including their caste, religion, or socio-economic status. These divisions can influence how individuals perceive political issues and make voting decisions.

4. Historical Factors: In many countries, social divisions have deep historical roots. Historical events, conflicts, or inequalities based on social divisions can influence voting patterns even in the present. People may vote based on long-standing grievances or to address historical injustices.

Therefore, statement 2 is also correct as social divisions do affect voting patterns in most countries.

Conclusion:
Both statement 1 and statement 2 are correct. Political parties competing on existing social divisions can lead to conflict or violence in a country, and social divisions indeed affect voting patterns in most countries.