Read the passage given below carefully and answer the questions that follow.…
2020
Read the passage given below carefully and answer the questions that follow.
The representative dimension of the new liberal political orders designed to protect individual rights, appeared as the best mechanism for actualizing popular rule or sovereignty - indeed democracy. As a result, it is more beneficial to assess the meaning and value of 'rights' as historical and political practices, rather than conceptual forms (especially as counterparts to 'virtue'). In this respect, the discourse of rights reflected a new official mode of combining ethics and power for political conduct. But the formally equal treatment of citizens belied a relatively arbitrary element, for the involvement of the citizenry in shaping the conduct of their representatives was left to influence elite procedures, qualifications and voluntary participation. Still, representation became the mythical means of transposing the authorizing power of the people to the new authorities of government. After all, representatives had more time and money to perfect their virtue and skill in conducting their work and were not supposed to be corrupted by the power that attended their offices. They were supposed to be better guardians and agents of public virtue than ordinary citizens as representation became institutionalized in the new states. The state wielded power over the people, diversifying rather than restricting the problems of demagoguery in ancient democracy that modern republics were supposed to correct.
Ques: What does the discourse of rights focus on?
- A.
Election procedures
- B.
Arbitrary freedom
- C.
Reasonable political conduct
- D.
New priests of power
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
Concept: In a passage-based ‘what does X focus on’ question, the correct option must restate what the passage itself explicitly says about X — the exact claim the author makes about that term — not a related detail about a different actor, process, or complaint raised elsewhere in the passage.
Application: The passage states directly that ‘the discourse of rights reflected a new official mode of combining ethics and power for political conduct.’ This is the passage’s own definition of what the discourse of rights was doing: it fused ethical justification with the exercise of power specifically to legitimise how political conduct was carried out — that is, it grounded political conduct in reasoned, ethical justification rather than raw or arbitrary force.
Cross-check: Checking each option against the passage’s exact wording confirms this and rules out the rest:
Election procedures — the passage’s mention of ‘elite procedures, qualifications and voluntary participation’ describes how citizen involvement in choosing representatives was constrained; that is a separate point about the practice of representation, not what the discourse of rights itself is said to focus on.
Arbitrary freedom — the passage’s ‘arbitrary element’ describes a shortfall in the equal treatment of citizens under representation, not a claim about the rights-discourse’s own focus; the passage never ties this arbitrariness to any notion of ‘freedom’.
New priests of power — no sentence in the passage characterises representatives or the discourse of rights this way; the phrase has no anchor in the text.
Result: Only ‘reasonable political conduct’ restates the passage’s own definitional sentence about the discourse of rights.