Comprehension

The Republican Party has lost its min(d) To win elections, a party obviously needs votes and constituencies. However first, it needs an ide(a) In 1994–95, the Republican Party had after a long struggle advanced a coherent, compelling set of political ideas expressed in a specific legislative agend(a) The political story of 1996 is that this same party, within the space of six weeks, became totally, shockingly intellectually derange(d) Think back. The singular achievement of the House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s 1994 revolution was that it swept into power united behind one comprehensive ideological goal: dismantling the welfare state. Just about anything in the contract with America and the legislative agenda of the 104th Congress is a mere subheading: welfare reform, tax cuts, entitlement reform, returning power to the states, the balanced budget (a supremely powerful means for keeping the growth of government in check).
The central Republican idea was that the individual, the family, the church, the schools — civil society — were being systematically usurped and strangled by the federal behemoth Republicans who were riding into Washington to slay it.
With this idea they met Clinton head-on in late 1995. And although they were tactically defeated — the government shutdown proved a disaster for Republicans — they won philosophically. Clinton conceded all their principles. He finally embraced their seven year balanced budget. Then, in a State of the Union speech that might have been delivered by a moderate Republican, he declared, “The era of Big Government is over,” the dominant theme of the Gingrich Revolution. It seems so long ago. Because then, astonishingly, on the very morrow of their philosophical victory, just as the Republicans prepared to carry these ideas into battle in November, came cannon fire from the rear. The first Republican renegade to cry ’Wrong!’ and charge was Steve Forbes. With his free-lunch, tax-cutting flat tax, he declared the balanced budget, the centrepiece of the Republican revolution, unnecessary. Then, no sooner had the Forbes mutiny been put down then Pat Buchanan declared a general insurrection. He too declared war on the party’s central ideology in the name not supply side theory but of class welfare, the Democratic weapon of choice against Republicanism.
The enemy, according to Buchanan, is not the welfare state. It is that conservative icon, capitalism, with its ruthless captains of industry, greedy financiers and political elite (Republicans included, of course). All three groups collaborate to let foreigners — immigrants, traders, parasitic foreign-aid loafers — destroy the good life of the ordinary American worker.
Buchanan holds that what is killing the little guy in America is the Big Guy, not Big Government. It blames not an overreaching government that tries to insulate citizens from life’s buffeting to the point where it creates deep dependency and irresponsibility, but an arrogant and unfeeling elite. Buchanan would protect and wield a mighty government apparatus to do so, government that builds trade walls and immigrant — repelling fences, that imposes punitive taxes on imports, that policies the hiring and firing practices of business with the arrogance of the most zealous affirmative action enforcer.
This is Reaganism standing on its hea(d) Republicans have focused too much on the mere technical dangers posed by this assault. Yes, it gives ammunition to the Democrats. Yes, it puts the eventual nominee through a bruising campaign and delivers him tarnished and drained into the ring against Bill Clinton.
But the real danger is philosophical, not tactical. It is axioms, not just policies, that are under fire. The Republican idea of smaller government is being proud to dust — by Republicans. In the middle of an election year, when they should be honing their themes against Democratic liberalism, Buchanan’s rise is forcing a pointless rearguard battle against a philosophical corpse, the obsolete Palaeo conservatism — a mix of nativism, protectionism and isolationism of the 1930s.
As the candidates’ debate in Arizona last week showed, the entire primary campaign will be fought on Buchanan’s grounds, fending off his Smoot-Hawley-Franco populism. And then what? After the convention, what does the nominee do? Try to resurrect the anti-welfare state themes of the historically successful 1994 congressional campaign? Well, yes, but with a terrible loss of energy and focus — and support. Buchanan’s constituency, by then convinced by their leader that the working man’s issues have been pushed aside, may simply walk on election day or, even worse, defect to the Democrats. After all, Democrats fight class war very well.
Political parties can survive bruising primary battles. They cannot survive ideological meltdown. Dole and Buchanan say they are fighting for the heart and soul of the Republican Party, heart and soul, however, will get you nowhere when you’ve lost your way — and your min(d)

Question: 1

Which broad ideology helped Newt Gingrich lead the Republican revolution of 1994?

Show Hint

In RC, when asked about “broad ideology” or “main goal,” pick the answer that covers the largest scope as per the passage.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • Tax cuts
  • Entitlement reform
  • Welfare reform
  • Welfare state dismantling
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The passage clearly states that the core ideological goal of the 1994 Republican Revolution was dismantling the welfare state. All other points such as welfare reform, tax cuts, and entitlement reform were considered subheadings under this central ide(a) Step 1: Identify key statement — “The singular achievement… was dismantling the welfare state.” Step 2: Compare with options — Only option (d) fully captures the broad ideology. Step 3: Eliminate partial answers — Welfare reform (c) is narrower; tax cuts (a) and entitlement reform (b) are specific measures, not the overarching ideology.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

Assuming the passage to be truthful, what does a party not need to win elections?

Show Hint

Watch for items the author lists directly — if a choice is absent from such a list, it’s likely the correct “not needed” answer.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • Votes
  • Money
  • Constituencies
  • Ideas
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The opening sentence says, “To win elections, a party obviously needs votes and constituencies. However, first, it needs an ide(a)” Money is never mentioned as a necessity in this context, indicating that among the given options, “money” is the one not needed according to the author’s framing. Step 1: Extract stated needs — Votes, constituencies, and ideas are explicitly state(d) Step 2: Identify the exception — Money is absent from the author’s list of essentials.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

Which of the following is not a Republican?

Show Hint

Confirm each option using explicit references from the passage before concluding “None of these.”
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • Newt Gingrich
  • Pat Buchanan
  • Bob Dole
  • None of these
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The passage references all three individuals — Gingrich, Buchanan, and Dole — in the context of the Republican Party. Therefore, none of them is “not a Republican.” Step 1: Verify each name — Gingrich led the revolution; Buchanan was a candidate; Dole was another key Republican figure. Step 2: Conclusion — Since all are Republicans, “None of these” is correct.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

The Republicans were tactically defeated by the Democrats because:

Show Hint

For cause-effect questions, focus on phrases showing direct consequence.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • of the shutdown of the government
  • the balanced budget plan failed
  • Steve Forbes led a revolution
  • Bill Clinton pre-empted them
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The passage explicitly states: “Although they were tactically defeated — the government shutdown proved a disaster for Republicans…” This is the direct cause of their tactical defeat. Step 1: Identify key phrase — “proved a disaster” directly links shutdown to defeat. Step 2: Eliminate distractors — Balanced budget (b) was agreed upon; Forbes (c) and Clinton (d) are later events.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5

Which of the following would be a suitable title for the passage?

Show Hint

For title questions, condense the passage into its central conflict or message in under ten words.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • The Democrats: Victory in Sight
  • Follies and Foibles of the Republican Party
  • Republicans — Are You Crazy?
  • Mutinies on the Republican Party
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The main theme is about internal ideological conflicts and challenges from within the Republican Party — described as mutinies by figures like Forbes and Buchanan. Option (d) captures this essence most accurately. Step 1: Determine main theme — Internal division undermining ideology. Step 2: Match to options — Only (d) directly conveys internal rebellion.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6

The word ‘obsolete’ in the context of the passage means:

Show Hint

Context words like dates or eras often signal “old” or “outdated” meanings in vocabulary questions.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • antiquated
  • absolute
  • boring
  • miasmic
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The passage refers to “obsolete Palaeo conservatism” from the 1930s, suggesting outdated ideas. “Antiquated” directly fits this context.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 7

What, according to the author, is the real danger for Republicans?

Show Hint

Focus on phrases beginning with “the real danger” or “the main problem” to identify the core concern.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • The fact that small government is being ground to dust
  • The fact that Bill Clinton is gaining popularity
  • The fact that it is axioms, not just policies that are under fire
  • The fact that the eventual nominee would be too tired to fight an election against Clinton
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The author warns that the real danger is “philosophical, not tactical… axioms under fire” — meaning the foundational beliefs of the party are being challenged from within.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 8

Which of the following, according to Buchanan, is not an enemy?

Show Hint

When the question asks “is not,” carefully reverse the logic of the passage to find the one option excluded from the author’s list.
Updated On: Aug 6, 2025
  • Big government
  • Immigrants
  • Captains of industry
  • Foreign-aid requesters
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Buchanan’s view, as per the passage, is that the enemy is not Big Government but rather elites, capitalists, and foreigners. This directly makes “Big Government” the correct choice here.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

View More Questions