B looks the best. OA?

I am not cent percent sure of the answer but B cant be ruled out because of "all poor countries". The argument talks about poor country in general. Its not talking about 'a specific poor country'.

Well B looks close, but D would be the best option for me.

Problem with B is that it talks about "entirely diffusing dissent" whereas the passage talks about media using propaganda and bringing back people's faith in the government. Riots and violent behavior cannot be diffused completely, but for those who dissent (disagree), propaganda does help.

So though propaganda might not be able to control riots or violent behavior, "dissent" is more a matter of beliefs, which does get quelled by propaganda, thereby pacifying any revolts "due to such dissent".

D talks about propaganda working through the instrument of "faith/belief". Most logically concluded.

You are equating violent behavior to "dissent from political crisis" which are not the same.

dissent leads to violent behavior in certain section, again there are certain other sections that will always be violent irrespective of dissent. "B" talks about the "dissent from political crisis" ...... not about violent behavior. Try to see the difference.

Nice discussion folks.

but I couldnt find the reasons convincing to rule out B.

OA please.

I am with E.

B cannot be the correct option because it fails to pick up one of the evidences in the question (about the youth). So it simply cannot be the answer. Waitin for the OA!
_________________

Is this okay?

good question.
The ans E correctly avoided the strong words

I thought it was D, I don't see why primarily makes it wrong, but I take that is because it mentions fundamental belief instead of belief in the goverment or belief in the vision of the goverment

I noticed B has been ruled out mostly for "all poor countries"

According to me, there is another error. The passage tells us that the aspects of violent behavior exhibited by the bored / vision-lacking youth are unaffected by propaganda as they have little to do with the economic/political crises.

We would then be able to infer that propaganda may not suffice to thwart dissent sourced at factors other than these crises. We cannot conclude as to the extent of its efficacy in dealing with direct results of the crises.

Therefore, it cannot follow from the passage that propaganda cannot entirely diffuse this kind of dissent. It quite possibly could, and the passage does not rule out this possibility. Though it says "thereby helping to restore belief in the efficacy of the government" .... this does not rule out the possibility that this restored belief succeeds in completely diffusing dissent stemming from an economic or political crisis, thought it may not affect the dissent that stems from boredom or a lack of vision.

I hope this makes sense.

A. Incorrect because nothing is said about the ease of either issue.
B. Read above.
C. Extreme statement, unjustified by parallel extremes in the passage.
D. No mention of "altering fundamental beliefs" in the passage.

E. I found this really tricky to accept, though I would have chosen it simply because I eliminated the other choices. The logic behind this statement lies in the fact that any effect that propaganda has on reducing YOUTH violence, is PROBABLY not due to restoring lack of faith in leadership (Since many youth groups are unconcerned with this), but possibly (and though the statement doesn't provide an alternate reason) because such propaganda provides glimpses of a positive future for such youth.

I also think that E is the correct answer.