Mr. Rajeev Sharma must realise that the PM was talking to the whole of India and not just the thinkers. In a speech that lasted about an hour, he touched upon subjects that he felt the people of India would like to listen to and probably act on his exhortations. On this he scored one hundred percent.
Sharma tore into the Indian psyche of being soft on male children as compared to female children. I am sure this will touch a chord in every set of parents and hopefully they will advise their male offspring to behave responsibly. All the other issues he touched upon would also directly affect the masses and the PM wanted positive action from his countrymen.
On internal security, defence and space, what could the people of India contribute if the PM had mentioned his plans? There is not much the Indian people can contribute directly in space and defence sectors. However, on internal security, he did indirectly touch upon it by exhorting all sections of society to shun all forms of violence, including communal. A lot of internal security issues would get sorted out if the communities live in peace and harmony among themselves. On defence and space, the PM would definitely talk to the people involved in those activities, which he has done admirably so far. Also, there is no merit in outlining your strategies in critical sectors such as defence.
Q1: According to the author who was the PM of India addressing?
(a) The whole of India including the masses.
(b) The thinkers of India.
(c) The parents of India.
(d) The space scientists.
Ans: (a)
Explanation: The author explicitly states that the PM was speaking to the whole of India and not only to thinkers. The hour-long speech covered subjects chosen because the people at large would like to hear them and might act on his exhortations. Therefore, the PM was addressing the general public, including the masses.
Q2: When the PM was referring to 'the Indian psyche of being soft', what was he referring to?
(a) Investments in the defence sector.
(b) Investments in the space sector.
(c) Issues of security.
(d) Indian parents being soft on male children as compared to female children.
Ans: (d)
Explanation: The phrase refers to a social bias in which parents tend to be more indulgent towards male children than female children. The author says Sharma "tore into the Indian psyche of being soft on male children," showing that this is the behaviour being criticised and that it will resonate with parents.
Q3: What did the PM want the parents to do?
(a) To produce more female children.
(b) To advise their male children to behave responsibly.
(c) To produce more male children.
(d) To produce male and female children equally.
Ans: (b)
Explanation: The author explains that the PM urged parents not to be unduly indulgent towards male children but instead to advise their sons to act responsibly. This shows the PM wanted parents to correct biased attitudes and encourage responsible behaviour in male offspring.
Q4: What was the length of the speech delivered by the PM?
(a) About 45 minutes.
(b) About 15 minutes.
(c) About 60 minutes.
(d) About 30 minutes.
Ans: (c)
Explanation: The passage states that the speech "lasted about an hour." One hour equals sixty minutes, so option (c) is correct.
Q5: The PM felt that the Indian masses could not contribute directly in which areas?
(a) Shun all forms of violence.
(b) Positive action from countrymen.
(c) Parents advising their male children to behave responsibly.
(d) In the defence and space sectors.
Ans: (d)
Explanation: The author notes that there is not much the general public can contribute directly to the space and defence sectors. Internal security was an area where public behaviour-such as shunning violence-could make a difference, but defence and space require specialised personnel and direct engagement by experts.
Q6: The writer felt that, 'On this he scored one hundred percent.' What was the writer referring to?
(a) On the PM being able to speak upon subjects that the people of India would like to listen to.
(b) On the PM's ability to talk to thinkers.
(c) On the PM's ability to talk to security experts.
(d) On the PM's ability to talk to defence experts.
Ans: (a)
Explanation: The writer's comment refers to the PM's success in choosing topics that the people of India would want to hear and act upon. Because the PM addressed such subjects effectively, the writer judged this aspect of the speech as completely successful.
Q7: What was one of the PM's solutions to solve internal security issues?
(a) Outlining strategies in space sectors.
(b) Outlining strategies in defence sectors.
(c) The communities living in peace and harmony among themselves.
(d) Parents not being soft on male children.
Ans: (c)
Explanation: The author explains that many internal security problems would be resolved if communities lived together in peace and harmony. This shows that fostering communal harmony was a key solution suggested by the PM for internal security issues.
Q8: What was another of the PM's solutions to solve internal security issues?
(a) Motivating the thinkers.
(b) Exhorting all sections of society to shun all forms of violence, including communal.
(c) Being hard on male children.
(d) Being hard on female children.
Ans: (b)
Explanation: The passage says the PM urged "all sections of society to shun all forms of violence, including communal." This exhortation to reject violence was presented as a direct way to improve internal security.
Q9: The writer feels that the PM has talked to certain sections wherever necessary. Which sections is the writer referring to?
(a) Internal security.
(b) Masses.
(c) Parents.
(d) The defence and space sectors.
Ans: (d)
Explanation: The writer notes that the PM would "definitely talk to the people involved in the defence and space sectors." This indicates that, where specialist input is required, the PM addresses the relevant experts rather than the general public.
Q10: Who felt 'there is no merit in outlining your strategies in critical sectors such as defence'?
(a) Mr Rajeev Sharma.
(b) The PM.
(c) The writer.
(d) The people of India.
Ans: (c)
Explanation: The writer expresses this view when arguing that critical strategies for defence should not be outlined to the general public. Thus, it is the writer who feels there is no merit in publicly revealing strategic plans for sensitive sectors such as defence.