The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question. By the beginning of the Common Era, three-quarters of humanity resided within the confines of four imperial orders: the Romans, the Han, the Parthians and the Kushans. This raises suggestion that most people in history are born, live, and die in an imperial world. To some among modern scholars, this indicates that empires are natural and even desirable political structures that humans have repeatedly created throughout history. They argue that subjects of empires might have preferred life under imperial rule to the uncertainties of life outside. Edward Gibbon in the 18th century, for one, portrayed the Roman Empire as the height of civilization in the center of swarming barbarism. It was he who proposed that the poverty and primitiveness of those barbarian societies gave birth to freedom within them. Such attitudes have contributed to conclusions made upon empires as bringers of civilization and non-imperial life being chaotic and unproductive. This view largely remains unchecked and thereby reconfirms in society the knowledge that civilization requires both control and violence. It's said that the ancient rulers for instance, of Egypt and Syria referred to disorganizing groups with the term 'Apiru.' This was a concept considered referential to Hebrews but it's only aeons down the line that it received elucidation as a referent for an individual dissent and/or refugee. The Han Empire also used to describe groups that rebel against its rule as being savage and barbaric. These tendencies used to make claims about the imperial violence and as a consequence, showed up empires as imperative to order and civilization. This is because Walter Scheidel bases his argument from an already shaky beginning when he assumes that painfully created empires with their powerful elites were the key competitive advantage in success. However, basing statistics from the 1978 Atlas of World Population History casts a shade on the statistics' validity and reliability, and because such claims have been based on such bare sources, one has to question the veracity of his assertive statement that empires were a good thing. New archaeological discoveries challenge the premise that outside the empires, nothing was sophisticated or developed. That was shown to be just the case in the Amazon, Africa, and Southeast Asia: Urban civilizations existed with neither central rulers nor empires, found, thus placing their argument on the contrary side to what had been purported—where many societies like those thrived with imperial structures. Archaeology has recovered rich histories of all sorts of non-imperial societies that flourished and developed their own ways and lifeways. These findings raise the stakes: ways in which human societies were diverse are at the same time raising entirely contemporary moral queries about all this in determining that empires were the main vehicles of civilization. Encouragingly: these facts suggest, also, that the 'winners' in history were not always those that lived under such imperial conditions. The present modern world is being shaped by empires, which have brought it to the point of environmental collapse, erosion of democracy, and wars of a new kind. But to study all human history, of non-imperial societies as well, might provide insights into alternative ways of living and organizing into societies. A broader angle of vision could be fruitful in rereading civilization and prospects for different futures. Such a exploration of the past is not about utopia but about recognizing the richness of human experience and its different possibilities for social realities. Such varied paths of human history will help us in understanding new ways of thinking to come out of future challenges regarding freedom, governance, and sustainability.

Question

cdquestions Admin · Accepted Answer

""

\(\text{The Politics of Change}\)	\(\text{The Change in Politics}\)	\(\text{Politics and Change:}\) A Global Perspective}
In "The Politics of Change," political analyst Dr. Emily Harper examines the dynamics of social movements and their impact on policy reform. Through detailed case studies, she explores how grassroots organizations, protests, and advocacy campaigns shape public opinion and influence lawmakers. Dr. Harper provides insights into the strategies that successful movements employ and discusses the challenges they face in a complex political landscape. She discusses key strategies, such as coalition-building, media engagement, and the use of digital platforms to amplify voices.	This book by veteran journalist Mark Stevens investigates the shifting political landscape in the 21st century. Focusing on major elections, emerging political parties, and the role of social media, Stevens analyzes how technology and demographics are transforming political engagement and voter behaviour. Through interviews with political leaders, campaign strategists, and everyday voters, Stevens uncovers how demographic shifts and technological advancements are reshaping political discourse in urban areas. He analyzes the implications of these changes for traditional political institutions and explores how movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter have disrupted conventional narratives.	In this insightful work, international relations scholar Dr. Anika Patel presents a global analysis of political change across various regions. She explores the factors that drive political transitions, including economic shifts, cultural movements, and international influences. Dr. Patel emphasizes the interconnectedness of global politics and how local changes can have far-reaching implications. She analyzes various factors driving political transitions, including economic upheaval, cultural shifts, and the impact of globalization. She provides case studies from diverse regions, such as the Arab Spring, democratic movements in Latin America, and shifts in power in Asia. The book serves as a vital resource for understanding the complexities of political evolution in a rapidly changing world.

According to the passage, why do some scholars believe empires are natural and attractive political structures for humans ?

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

What does the passage suggest about the reliability of the population statistics in the Atlas of World Population History?

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

Which of the following best describes the role of archaeology in challenging traditional views of ancient societies, according to the passage ?

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

What does the passage imply about the portrayal of non-imperial societies by ancient rulers ?

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

Questions Asked in CAT exam