Should there be a ban on affiliation of student unions with political parties in colleges and universities? Arguments: I. Yes, because political parties often take undue advantage of student unions to serve their own selfish interests. II. No, because without the support of political parties many student unions will not be able to survive.

Introduction / Context:
This question focuses on the link between student unions and political parties. The issue is whether such affiliation should be banned. One argument stresses misuse of student unions by political parties, and the other says that unions need party support to survive. You must judge which argument is strong.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: There should be a ban on affiliation of student unions with political parties.
• Argument I: Yes, because political parties often exploit student unions for selfish political gains.
• Argument II: No, because student unions cannot survive without political party support.
• We assume that the main purpose of student unions is to represent student interests rather than serve political parties.

Concept / Approach:
A strong argument should focus on the larger objective of the institution involved. In this case, the objective is healthy student representation and campus environment. Exploitation by political parties directly harms this goal. On the other hand, survival of unions only because of party support is not a socially desirable objective by itself.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Examine argument I. It states that political parties take undue advantage of student unions for their own interests. Step 2: This is directly related to the question because it shows why affiliation might be harmful to student welfare. Hence argument I is strong. Step 3: Examine argument II. It argues that without political parties, student unions may not survive. Step 4: Mere survival of unions is not the primary goal. If they survive mainly as tools of political parties, that undermines their educational purpose. Hence argument II is weak.

Verification / Alternative check:
If you think from the perspective of parents and education administrators, they would value independence of student bodies over dependence on external political forces.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options that treat argument II as strong overlook the fact that survival for the sake of politics is not a valid objective. The option that both arguments are strong is wrong because they are not equally valid. The option that neither is strong is wrong because argument I clearly supports the ban with a relevant reason.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes confuse feasibility with desirability. Argument II describes a possible consequence but does not show that political support is desirable or beneficial for students.

Final Answer:
Thus, only argument I is strong, so the correct option is the one that selects argument I alone as strong.