Statement & Assumption — “The textbook variety of the profession and practice of democracy has not worked in countries like India where ground realities are different.” Which assumptions are implicit? I. Democracy is not suitable for poor countries. II. Ground realities differ from one country to another.

Introduction / Context:
The statement contrasts “textbook” democracy with “ground realities” in countries like India, attributing failure to contextual differences, not to poverty per se.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Textbook models may not transfer well across contexts.
• India’s realities are “different.”

Concept / Approach:
Assumption II is necessary: without cross-country differences in ground realities, blaming the textbook model’s failure on misfit makes no sense. Assumption I (unsuitability for poor countries) adds an unstated economic qualifier and overgeneralises beyond the text.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Deny II: If realities did not differ, the explanation collapses. Hence II is implicit.I: Not required and not mentioned; poverty is not the stated factor.

Verification / Alternative check:
Implementation failure arguments often rest on context-sensitivity—precisely II.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I injects an economic claim not present in the statement.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating “India” with “poor countries” and inferring a universal anti-democracy claim.

Final Answer:
Only Assumption II is implicit.