Thanks for the question! So let’s take a recap of the passage. We’re told that it’s more important criticize democracies with human rights violations than dictatorships with more violent humans right offenses. Why? Because democratic human rights violations are more reprehensible, and also criticism is more likely to affect democracies.
Now we’re asked for something that’s a proper inference from the passage; in other words, this is a Must Be True question. As long as something is fully supported by the passage, it’s the correct answer. Now take a look at (B), which tells us that some human rights violations are more reprehensible than other, more violent human rights violations. Well, we know that democracies have more reprehensible human rights violations than dictators (from the second sentence). And we also know that dictatorships can commit more violent human rights offenses (from the first sentence). But putting these two facts together, that just means that there are human rights violations (those of democracies) that are more reprehensible than other more violent human rights violations (those of dictatorships). So (B) has direct support from the passage, and is the correct answer.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
CarlosJuly 29, 2022
Explain E please.
Emil-KunkinAugust 7, 2022
Hi, E is saying that democracies are less likely to change their actions as a result of criticism than dictatorships are. This is exactly the opposite of what the passage tells us- the author states that democracies are more likely to respond to criticism
