These NCERT Solutions for Class 9 Social Science Civics Chapter 1 Democracy in the Contemporary World Questions and Answers are prepared by our highly skilled subject experts to help students while preparing for their exams.
Democracy in the Contemporary WorldNCERT Solutions for Class 9 Social Science Civics Chapter 1
Class 9 Civics Chapter 1 Democracy in the Contemporary World Textbook Questions and Answers
Which of the following does not to the spread of democracy in the first decade after 1945?
(a) Struggle by the people
(b) Invasion by foreign countries
(c) End of colonialism
(d) People’s desire for freedom.
Which of the following statement is true about today’s world:
(a) Monarchy as a form of government has vanished.
(b) The relationship betwefen different countries has become more democratic than ever before,
(c) In more and more countries, rulers are being elected by the people.
(d) There are no more military dictators in the world.
Use one of the following statements to complete the Sentence. Democracy in international organizations requires that:
1. The rich countries should have a greater say ,
2. Countries should have a say according to their military power.
3. Countries should be treated with respect in proportion to their population
4. All countries in the world should be treated equally.
1. (d), 2. (c), 3. (d), 4. (d).
Based on the information given in this chapter, match the following countries and The path democracy has taken in that country:
|Country||Path to Democracy|
|(a) Chile||I. Freedom from British colonial rule.|
|(b) Nepal||II. End of military dictatorship.|
|(c) Poland||III. End of one Party rule|
|(d) Ghana||IV. King agreed to give up his powers.|
(a) II, (b) IV, (c) III, (d) I.
What are the difficulties people face in a non-democratic country? Give answers drawing from the examples given in this chapter.
People face numerous difficulties in a non-democratic country. Some such difficulties are as under :
- People are devoid of their basic rights;
- They are not allowed to protest against the atrocities inflicted on them;
- They are not permitted to express and demonstrate their opposition;
- They are not allowed to form organizations to state their grievances.
- They do not choose their rulers, nor change them.
- They do riot possess freedom; they do not express their opinion nor can they organize a protest and political action.
Which freedoms are usually taken away when a democracy is overthrown by the military?
When democracy is overthrown by the military, the people lose all their freedoms. They do not have the freedom to speech and, expression of their opinion. They cannot form political organizations, or organize their protest and action.
Which of the following positions can contribute to democracy at the global level? Give reasons for your answer in each case.
(a) My country gives more money to international institutions. Therefore, I want to be treated with more respect and exercise more power.
(b) My country may be small or poor. But my voice must be, heard, with equal respect, because these decisions will affect my country.
(c) Wealthy nations will have a greater say in international affairs. They cannot let their interests suffer just because they are outnumbered by poor nations.
(d) Big countries like India must have a greater say in international organizations.
(a) By merely giving more money to the international institutions, a country should not be treated with more respect and exercise power. Democracy does not thrive on luxuries, nor by the rich. It is plutocracy, the rule of the rich, and hot the rule of the people.
(b) A country may be small in size and poor economically. Democracy will strengthen if all the countries, irrespective of their size or economy, are treated equally. Decisions in democracy affect all the countries equally.
(c) If wealthy nations, because of their wealth, have a greater say in international affairs, they would make decisions that would promote; their interests. This would not contribute to democracy, rather it would harm it adversely.
(d) Countries Which are large in population and bigger in size such as India should have their say, not at the cost of smaller ones. Representation of interests and number should be given the corresponding weightage. John Stuart Mill was strong of the view that the interest should not be sacrificed at the cost of number, nor the vice-versa.
Here are three opinions heard in a television debate on the struggle for democracy in Nepal. Which of these do you agree with and why?
Guest 1: India is a democracy. Therefore, the Indian government must support the people of Nepal who are struggling against monarchy and democracy.
Guest 2: That is a dangerous argument. We would be in the same position as the US was in Iraq. Remember, no outside force can promote democracy.
Guest 3: But why should we bother about the internal affairs of another country? We should be worried about our business interests there, not about democracy.
Democracy breeds from within. Imposition of democracy on others or from above is, indeed, dangerous as the USA. really did in Iraq. It is impertinent that any democratic country, India including, should encourage democracy wherever it exists, but no country should implant democracy. One can teach people swimming if they do not learn to swim. The opinion of guest 3 is really weighty, for we should protect our interests in other countries, not that we make them democrat by losing our interest.
In an imaginary country called Happyland, the people overthrew the foreign ruler and brought back the old royal family. They said: “After all their ancestors were our kings before foreigners started ruling us. It is good that we have one strong ruler, who can help us become rich and powerful”.
When someone talked about democracy the wise men said it is a foreign idea. Their struggle was to throw the foreigners and their ideas out of the country. When someone demanded freedom for the media, the elders thought that too much criticism of the ruler would not help them improve their living standards. “After, all, the king is so kind and interested in the welfare of all the subjects. Why create problems for him. Don’t we all want to be happy?”
After reading the above passage, Chaman, Champa, and Chandra made the following observations:
Chaman: Happyland is a democratic country because people were able to throw out the foreign rulers and bring back the king.
Champa: Happyland is not a democratic country because people cannot
criticize the ruler. The king may be nice and may provide economic prosperity, but a king cannot give a democratic rule.
Chandru: What people heed is happiness. So they are willing to allow their new ruler to make decisions for them. If people are happy to must be democratic.
What is your opinion about each of these statements? What do you think about the form of government in this country?
Democracy means the rule of the people, by them and for them. A slave country is never a democratic Country. National independence is one where people are free from the foreign rule.
The liberation from the British and independence of India was connected with the democratic ideal. But, if a country liberties itself from foreign rule and reverts back to the monarchical system does not make that democracy, for the monarchy is not democracy.
In fact, Where the rulers are hot subject to criticism by the people in general, their one does not find democracy. The essence of democracy is that the people rule themselves, that they can criticize their rulers and that they have freedom of opinion and expression, and that they can change their rulers through election:
Democracy and happiness are not the same, A happy man is not a democratic man, though, for a democracy, there is a need to have a good economy. People can build democracy and can also build their economy: the two supplement each other.
A country that has a king at its head is a monarchy and not a democracy, if the king is only a constitutional head, a country can be, as in Britain, a democratic form of government.
Class 9 Civics Chapter 1 Democracy in the Contemporary World Additional Important Questions and Answers
How is Allende pronounced?
Allende is pronounced as Avendo.
When was Allende’s government overthrown?
Allende’s government was overthrown on September 11, 1973.
When was Allende made President of Chile?
Salvador Allende was made the President of Chile in 1970.
Mention the name of the political party which came to power in Chile in 1970.
Who succeeded Allende in Chile in a military coup?
General Augusta Planchet succeeded Allende.
Where is Calama located?
Calama is located about a thousand miles away from the capital of Chile, Santiago.
How did the women of Calama demonstrate their grief?
They remained silent, always in silence.
Which state in our country has a shape similar to Chile?
Can you find, examples similar to what happened to Women of Calama from other countries?
In Russia during the Czarist regime.
Can you identify who is the President of Chile now?
Michelle Bachelet (Jan, 2006).
Why did newspapers in that country not write about women of Calama in those years?
The newspapers in that country, in those years, were under state censorship.
Which political party governed Poland in 1980?
The Polish UnitedWorkers Party—a one-party monopoly of power.
In which factory in the city of Golansk file strike began in 1980?
Name the person who joined the strikers in Poland in 1980.
Name any two countries where the Communist Party ruled during the Polish events in 1980.
Bulgaria and Hungary.
Identify a few countries around Poland.
Germany, Lithuania, Belarus, Slovakia, Ukraine.
Why did the strike begin in the shipyard?
The strike began to take back a crane operator a woman worker, who faced unjust dismissal from service.
Why was an independent trade union so important for Poland?
It was the first trade union formed independently of the government’s, control.
When did the Glorious revolution occur in England?
The glorious revolution occurred in England in 1688.
When did the 13 colonies declare independence in what is now known as the United States of America?
Mention the several steps taken by the AHende’s government to help the poor workers.
The Allende’s government, in Chile, took several steps to help the poor workers. These included
- reforms in the educational system
- free milk for children
- redistribution of land among the farmers.
Give two reasons Why AHende’s political party was popular in Chile?
Allende’s political party, the Popular Unity was popular in Chile for reasons given below:
1. It was opposed to foreign companies exploiting natural resources (copper) against the interests of the people of Chile.
2. The rich opposed Allende’s political party, though the workers, by and large, liked Allende’s efforts.
What did Pinocfiet’s regime dp after overthrowing Allende’s government in Chile in 1973?
Pinochet’s regime, after taking over power, began torturing people and killing those who were supporting Allende In the process, more than 2000 people were killed by the military regime. Many more were, reported ‘missing’. No one knows what had happened to them.
Why did Allende refer to “workers” in his speech? Why would have the rich opposed to him?
Before Allende’s government wa$ taken over by Pinochet’s military regime, he got the opportunity to address his people, referring to them as ‘workers’; The rich-opposed Allende because his policies were pro-workers and pro-poor.
Think why would women and children of Calama be asked to keep quiet? Why people could not react to those events?
The women and children of Calama were asked to keep quiet because if they spoke, their children would be killed by the military. People, could not react to the military’s torture because they knew that if they reacted, they would also be tortured.
How was Poland ruled in 1980?
Poland, in 1980, was ruled by the Polish United Worker Party. Then there was a one-party monopoly of power in Poland. No one was permitted to oppose the official party line. The government trade unions owned all the factories. These trade unions were not independent of the ruling party.
Why did the strike begin in Lenin Shipyard in Gdansk?
The workers of the Lenin Shipyard started a strike in the city of Gdansk. The demand of the workers was to take back a crane operator, a woman worker, who faced an unjust dismissal from service.
Which other demands were put forth as the strike spread across the whole city of Gdansk?
The Lenin Shipyard strike spread as Lech Walesa, also dismissed from the service as an electrician, joined the strike. The demands of the workers began swelling:
- all the workers removed from the service be taken back;
- the workers sought the right to have independent trade unions;
- political process be made free;
- censorship on the press is removed.
Mention two provisions of the 21 point agreement made between the Polish government and the workers led by Walesa.
The two provisions of the 21 point, an agreement between the Polish government and the workers were:
- The workers’ right to form independent trade unions was guaranteed.
- They got the right to go on strike.
Why did the Polish government lead by the Polish United Workers Party got panicky?
The Polish Workers United Party got panicky as the solidarity, led by Walesa had more than one crore workers as its members; the revelations that the government was corrupt and mismanaged made the latter declare martial in the country. As thousands of Solidarity members were put in prison, the government withdrew freedoms given to the people.
What led to the rise of Walesa attaining power in Poland?
In the late 1980s, Walesa was gaining popularity. He led another strike in 1988. The government had already become weak; the economy was bn its .decline; there was no hope of government’s getting support from the USSR. An agreement resulted in having free elections in the country. The solidarity won 99 seats of the Senate which had a total strength of 100. Lech Walesa became the President in October 1990.
What reasons would you give to say that Solidarity was popular in 1990?
The following are the reasons to say that Solidarity was popular in Poland in 1990:
- Solidarity was a trade union organized to protect the interests of the workers.
- It sought to gain rights in favor of the workers, i.e. the right to organize, and the right to strike
- It sought to gain rights such as freedoms to talk about freely and to express protests.
- It was able to organize itself under the able leadership of men like Lech Walesa.
What freedoms were devised for the people in Chile and Poland when they did not have democracy?
When Chile and Poland did not have democracy in the 1970s and 1980s respectively, the people were denied numerous freedoms. Some of these were:
- They were denied the right to personal liberties;
- They were denied the right to freedom of speech;
- They were not allowed to organize a strike;
- They were not allowed to register their protests freely;
- They were not permitted to express their views in the press; the press was also not free.
Can you think of reasons why people would have liked a change in their government?
The people would have liked to have a change in their government because they would have liked a democracy in place of non-democracy; their desire to have a change would have ushered in an era of freedoms and prosperity for the people.
Identify some features that made Portugal under Salazar a case of non-democracy.
- Salazar overthrew the elected, government in 1926.
- From 1926 to 1974, Salazar ruled as a dictator.
- Salazar suppressed opposition; killed their leaders;
- He organized ‘concentration camps’ where lie punished those who were involved in the working-class in forests.
- He ruled through spies who were present in public places?
- Citizens were denied freedoms; they could not discuss politics in the open.
What could be the impact of the presence of secret police in public places? Why is it necessary for people to discuss politics without fear?
The presence of secret police in public places: cafes, railway stations, post offices, hospitals, universities, factories— would mean having a reign of terror. Under such a system, citizens would not talk against the regime for fear of being arrested and tortured. Politics without fear is a guarantee of democracy; with fear, that of a non-democracy.
Why were women given voting rights much later than men in most countries? Why did this not happen in India?
Franchise (Voting rights) movements started in different countries at different times. These movements sought male franchise first. This is why men got voting rights earlier. In India, this did not happen so because democratic and voting rights ushered for all at the same time after independence.
How did the French Revolution, the Glorious Revolution and the American War of independence help pave the way for democracy?
The French revolution of 1789 did not establish a secure and stable democracy, in France. But it prepared the ground for and inspired many struggles for democracy all over Europe. The French revolution was preceded by a more limited but no less significant movement in Britain. This culminated in the ‘Glorious’ revolution of 1688. Around the same time as the French revolution, the British colonies in what is today the United States of America declared themselves independent.
Since the principle underlying the Declaration of Independence of 1776 was democratic, it was natural that they set up a democratic system in the Constitution of the United States of America. These developments decided once for all that there are no divine rights of the kings that men and women constitute the basis on which their rights and liberties are built, that men and women are bom equal and born free.
How would you describe Salazar’s regime? as a dictatorship? Elections were held in Salazar’s Portugal. Why should it not be called a democracy?
Salazar captured power in Portugal in 1926. For about a half-century, he ruled the country as a dictator. He was cruel to the opposition leaders, tortured them, and killed them. His government started concentration camps on a barren island to punish those involved in working-class protests. The spies and informers of the secret police were present in all public places, cafes, railway stations, post offices/ hospitals, offices, universities, and factories.
Being fearful of arrest, the citizen could not dare to discuss politics in the open. After 1945, the government allowed the opposition to campaign for one month before the elections. This one month of’ ‘free time was never enough to mobilize people politically for support during elections as no opposition was allowed after elections. The elections were held irregularly, every four or seven years. The opposition never won a single seat in these elections.
The late 17th century and the early 20th century saw some “democracies” in the world. Why were they not called democracies in the sense we use in the world today?
Some countries of the world could be called ‘democracies’ by the beginning of the twentieth century. But these countries, which became democratic in the 19th century, did not allow all people to vote. Often the women did not have a right to vote. In some countries, only people owning property had the right to vote. In the United States of America, blacks did not have a right to vote all over the country until the second half of the twentieth century. So we cannot say that these were full democracies in the sense in. which we understand them today. Never, the beginning for democracy had begun. These countries had some of the following things common to them:
- The governments were no more dictatorial. A measure of governmental accountability was seen.
- Some kind of limited representative systems had started.
- People had started launching movements for their rights.
Where do you place Ghana as a democratic nation?
The country that is today called Ghana used to be a British colony called Gold Coast. This country became independent in 1957. It was among the first counties in Africa to be liberated from colonialism. It inspired other African countries to struggle for freedom. Kwame Nkrumah, son of a goldsmith and a teacher himself was active in the independence struggle of his country. For him, like many other African nationalists, the struggle against foreign rule was linked to establishing the democratic rule.
After independence, Nkrumah became the first prime minister and then the president of Ghana. He was a friend of Jawaharlal Nehru and an inspiration for democrats, in Africa. But unlike Nehru, he deviated from the path of democracy and got himself elected the president for life. Nkrumah justified his actions by arguing that “Even a system based on a democratic constitution may need backing up in the period following independence by emergency measures of a totalitarian kind”. Shortly thereafter, in 1966, he was overthrown by the military, Ghana was no longer a democracy.
Explain wi(h examples as to how democracy lias been adopted in the world since 199’0’s.
1990 saw’ numerous changes in the World. The communist regime came to an end in Poland, and Hungary in eastern European countries. The USSR disintegrated as a simple country and a multi-party system came to be adopted. Major changes, especially in Pakistan and Bangladesh” made a transition from army rule to a democratic regime in the 1990s. In Nepal, the monarch gave up many of his powers to become a ‘constitutional monarch’ to be guided by elected leaders. These changes were not permanent and were reversed in Pakistan and Nepal.
Yet the overall trend in this period is of more and more countries turning to democracy. This phase continues till now. By 2002, about 140 countries were holding multi-party elections. This number was higher than ever before. More than 80 previously non-democratic countries have made significant advances, towards democracy, during this period. but even today, there are many countries where people cannot express their opinion freely. They still cannot elect their leaders. They cannot decide how they will live in the present and in the future.
Give a detailed account of developments that took place in Myanmar since 1990.
Elections were held in Myanmar (earlier Burma) in 1990. The NED (National League for Democracy), led by Aung Sang Suti Kyi won with a comprehensive victory. But the military rulers of Myanmar refused to recognise the election results and put the elected pro-democracy leaders including Suu Kyi under house arrest. Political activists, accused of even the most trivial offenses, have been jailed for seven to fifteen years. Anyone caught publicly airing views or issuing statements critical of the regime were sentenced to up to twenty years in prison. Due to the coercive policies of the military-ruled government in Myanmar, about 6 to 10 lakh people in that country, have been uprooted from their homes and have taken shelter elsewhere.
Despite the restrictions of house arrest, Suu Kyi continued to campaign for democracy. According to her, The quest for democracy in Myanmar is the struggle of the people to live whole, meaningful lives as free and equal members of the world community. Her struggle has won international recognition; She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Yet the people in Myanmar are still struggling for establishing a democratic government.
Are we moving towards global democracy? Give examples.
We know that democracy has expanded. Now more arid more people in Asia and Africa are also able to take part in forming governments in their countries. But does this trend also hold true for relationships among different countries or people from different countries? Are we moving towards global democracy?
A quick look at some of the major global institutions suggests that we are not.
Expansion of democracy within nations has not led to greater democracy at the international level. Consider these facts:
1. The United Nations (UN) is the largest and best-known international organization in the world. Every one of its 192 member countries has one vote in the UN General Assembly. But all the crucial decisions about taking action in any conflict situation are taken by the 15 member Security Council. While ten of its members are non-permanent, the real power is with five ‘permanent’ members-USA, Russia, UK, France, and China. Any one of these five can ‘veto’, that is to reject or to stall, any decision of the Security Council.
2. International Monetary Fund (IMF) is one of the biggest money lenders for any country in the World. Its 173 member states do not have equal voting power. The vote of each country is weighted by how much money it has given to IMF. Eight of the leading ‘G-8’ (Canada, Germany, Japan, Italy, UK, USA, Russia, and France) countries have a majority of votes. The World Bank has a similar .system of voting. The President of the World Bank is always a citizen of the USA, nominated by the Treasury Secretary (Finance Minister) of the US government.
3. The World Trade Organisation (WTO) is the key-global institution that decides upon rules of trade among different countries. Every decision of the WTO has to be by consensus of all the countries. So it appears to be fully democratic. But most of the decisions are taken in informal meetings which are secret and to which only some powerful countries are invited.
In fact, While nations are becoming more democratic than they were earlier/ international organizations are becoming less democratic. In this sense, the collapse of the USSR had a negative effect on democracy.
Now, the USA is the only superpower in the world. This has encouraged the USA to act unilaterally, without seeking the consent of or even consultation with other countries. This has led more and more people and countries to say that the UN should be more democratized. Only through equal participation of all the members, can the UN be a democratic organisation. In this way, the world also can be more democratic.