One argument against a multi-party system is the _______

Step 1: Analyze the question The question asks for a disadvantage (an argument against) of a multi-party system, which is a political system where many parties compete for power.

Step 2: Explain the concept In a multi-party system, several parties contest elections. Advantages include wider choice for voters, more representation of different interests, and stronger checks on government. Common criticisms include:

• Political rivalry that can cause tension and instability
• Coalition governments that may be weak or short-lived
• Higher costs of running elections and campaigns
• Division of the people along party lines (sometimes ethnic or religious)

Step 3: Evaluate each option

• A. Inability to attract foreign assistance: Incorrect. Foreign aid depends on diplomacy and economic relations, not on how many parties a country has.
• B. High cost of conducting elections: Plausible. More parties mean more candidates, more ballot materials, more monitoring, and more administrative expense. This is a recognized criticism.
• C. Banning of interest groups: Incorrect. Multi-party systems allow interest groups. Banning them is typical of authoritarian or one-party systems.
• D. Encouragement of opposition and instability: This sounds like a criticism too, but opposition is actually a feature and strength of multi-party democracy, since it provides checks and balances. Instability is an argument sometimes made, but "encouragement of opposition" is not a flaw in itself, so the option is weaker and mixed.

Step 4: My conclusion Option D is tempting because instability is sometimes cited, but it bundles in "opposition", which is a democratic strength rather than a weakness.

Answer: B. High cost of conducting elections

Exam tip: In JAMB Government, when two options both seem like disadvantages, check whether any part of an option is actually a benefit of the system. Opposition is normally treated as a plus of multi-party democracy, so an option praising or condemning it in a mixed way is usually a trap. Also remember: costly elections and party rivalry are the standard "cons", while wide choice and representation are the standard "pros".