In a recent study, Mario Garcandiacute;a argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the andldquo;Mexican American Generationandrdquo; was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the eraandrsquo;s most important scholars, Garcandiacute;a does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, Garcandiacute;aandrsquo;s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generationandrsquo;s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. Garcandiacute;a acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, Garcandiacute;a may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, Garcandiacute;a argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to Garcandiacute;a, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican populationandrsquo;s political activism.The passage suggests that Garcandiacute;a assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americansandrsquo; lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

GMAT Exam > GMAT Questions > In a recent study, Mario García argues...

Join the Discussion on the App

First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.

Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.

The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?

a)
Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.
b)
Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.
c)
The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.
d)
Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.
e)
Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Verbal Reasoning (Level 600) - 1

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United State...

To determine which statement the passage suggests García assumes to be true, let’s examine each option in the context of the passage:

Increased Ethnic Consciousness and Political Activity: The passage questions the assumption that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the U.S. necessarily led to increased political activism. García argues that these new leaders were more acculturated and politically active, but the passage challenges this link by highlighting the need for a better understanding of factors like bilingualism and immigration patterns. This option does not align with García’s assumption but rather with the passage’s critique of it.
Increased Familiarity with U.S. Culture and Political Activity: García argues that between 1930 and 1960, a more acculturated generation of Mexican American leaders emerged. García seems to assume that increased familiarity with U.S. culture, resulting from the higher proportion of U.S.-born Mexican Americans, contributed to increased political activity. This assumption is suggested by García’s argument that these leaders were more politically active due to their experience and acculturation.
Assimilation and Lack of Political Activity: The passage does not suggest García believes that assimilation led to a lack of interest in political activity. Instead, García's work argues that the more acculturated leaders were more politically active, so this option is inconsistent with García’s assumptions.
Political Militancy for Full Civil Rights: While García discusses how the new generation of leaders was determined to achieve full civil rights, the passage does not specifically state that García assumes this determination was the primary motivation for political militancy.
Political Protest from Discrimination and World War II Rhetoric: García notes that the new leaders were influenced by discrimination and World War II rhetoric. However, this influence does not directly address García’s assumption about increased familiarity with U.S. culture and its impact on political activity.

Correct Option B:

Explanation: The passage implies that García assumes the increased familiarity of Mexican Americans with U.S. culture (through increased proportion of U.S.-born individuals) contributed to their heightened political activity. The passage critiques this assumption but does not dispute that García made it. Hence, option B is the best fit.

View all questions of this test

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes which one of the following about the Mexican American political activists of the 1930s and 1940s?

View answer

In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.It can be inferred from the passage that García would most probably agree with which one of the following statements about the Mexican American political activists of the 1930s and 1940s?

View answer

In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.According to the passage, the League of United Latin American Citizens differed from the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People in that the League of United Latin American Citizens

View answer

The recruitment and development of talent is a growing priority for many organizations, and is increasingly regarded as an important competitive advantage. One example of this emphasis on talent development is the creation of so-called ‘C’ level executive roles—Chief Talent or Personnel Officer—that represent the interests of the Human Resources department. This is a significant change from past years, during which Human Resources was generally considered a lower priority, even a necessary evil, and a destination for executives that did not thrive in other departments.This change has had an important beneficiary—women.An extraordinarily high proportion of Human Resources departments are run by women, reflecting the composition of the departments themselves. For better or worse, Human Resources positions have long been perceived as natural roles for women, as women are generally regarded as more nurturing and service-oriented than their male counterparts. As these traits are considered core to the functioning of effective Human Resources personnel, the advancement of women within HR departments has been routine and that, in turn, has attracted more women. Additionally, the lifestyle of workers in the Human Resources department is often not as demanding in terms of hours and weekends worked as it is for workers in other departments; many women with children find this appealing.The preponderance of female heads of Human Resources departments and the higher prioritization of talent development have combined to give many female executives increased authority and influence. Many women, after performing well in a Human Resources capacity, have been given additional responsibilities in other departments. Also, more female executives have been asked to represent their organizations at industry conferences, further increasing their visibility.Q.The passage implies that an organization with a Chief Talent Officer

View answer

A major network news organization experienced a drop in viewership in the week following the airing of a controversial report on the economy. The network also received a very large number of complaints regarding the report. The network, however, maintains that negative reactions to the report had nothing to do with its loss of viewers.Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the networks position?

View answer

Top Courses for GMATView all

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2024

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

100 RCs for GMAT

Top Courses for GMAT

View all

In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice In a recent study, Mario García argues that in the United States between 1930 and 1960 the group of political activists he calls the “Mexican American Generation” was more radical and politically diverse (5) than earlier historians have recognized. Through analysis of the work of some of the era’s most important scholars, García does provide persuasive evidence that in the 1930s and 1940s these activists anticipated many of the reforms proposed by the more (10) militant Chicanos of the 1960s and 1970s. His study, however, suffers from two flaws.First, García’s analysis of the evidence he provides to demonstrate the Mexican American Generation’s political diversity is not entirely (15) consistent. Indeed, he undermines his primary thesis by emphasizing an underlying consensus among various groups that tends to conceal the full significance of their differences. Groups such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, an (20) organization that encouraged Mexican Americans to pursue a civil rights strategy of assimilation into the United States political and cultural mainstream, were often diametrically opposed to organizations such as the Congress of Spanish-Speaking People, a coalition (25) group that advocated bilingual education and equal rights for resident aliens in the United States. García acknowledges these differences but dismisses them as insignificant, given that the goals of groups as disparate as these centered on liberal reform, not (30) revolution. But one need only note the fierce controversies that occurred during the period over United States immigration policies and the question of assimilation versus cultural maintenance to recognize that Mexican American political history since 1930 (35) has been characterized not by consensus but by intense and lively debate.Second, García may be exaggerating the degree to which the views of these activists were representative of the ethnic Mexican population residing in the (40) United States during this period. Noting that by 1930 the proportion of the Mexican American population that had been born in the United States had significantly increased, García argues that between 1930 and 1960 a new generation of Mexican American (45) leaders appeared, one that was more acculturated and hence more politically active than its predecessor. Influenced by their experience of discrimination and by the inclusive rhetoric of World War II slogans, these leaders, according to García, were determined to (50) achieve full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent. However, it is not clear how far this outlook extended beyond these activists. Without a better understanding of the political implications of important variables such as patterns of bilingualism (55) and rates of Mexican immigration and naturalization, and the variations in ethnic consciousness these variables help to create, one cannot assume that an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase (60) in the ethnic Mexican population’s political activism.The passage suggests that García assumes which one of the following to have been true of Mexican Americans between 1930 and 1960?a)Increased ethnic consciousness among Mexican Americans accounted for an increase in political activity among them.b)Increased familiarity among Mexican Americans with United States culture accounted for an increase in political activity among them.c)The assimilation of many Mexican Americans into United States culture accounted for Mexican Americans’ lack of interest in political activity.d)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political militancy as a means of achieving full civil rights for all United States residents of Mexican descent.e)Many Mexican Americans were moved to political protest by their experience of discrimination and the patronizing rhetoric of World War II slogans.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.

Explore Courses for GMAT exam