Fill in the blanks: 'Through ? , our future shall have no limits. Without our individual, personal involvement, there will be ? to worry about'.

Fill in the blanks: 'Through ? , our future shall have no limits. Without our individual, personal involvement, there will be ? to worry about'.

• A. Collective involvement / No future
• B. National involvement / No problems
• C. Collective action / Plenty to worry about
• D. Shared participation / Risk to worry about

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is how different levels of involvement shape the outcome for the future, using a strong contrast to stress the message. The first blank should be filled with a form of involvement that matches the idea of many people working together, so “collective involvement” fits best. It keeps the tone and meaning consistent with the claim that working together can open up limitless potential for the future. For the second blank, “No future” creates a stark, concrete consequence of not taking personal part in the effort: if there is no individual involvement, there will be no future to worry about. That abrupt contrast—an unlimited future when we act collectively, versus no future at all without individual effort—lands as a memorable warning and reinforces the contrast between the two clauses. Other word options would disrupt the flow or shift the meaning. For example, shifting to a different form of involvement or a different scope changes the sense of who is involved or what is at stake; phrasing like “plenty to worry about” would not pair as cleanly with the idea of no future. The chosen pair preserves parallel structure and delivers a concise, impactful message.

The main idea here is how different levels of involvement shape the outcome for the future, using a strong contrast to stress the message. The first blank should be filled with a form of involvement that matches the idea of many people working together, so “collective involvement” fits best. It keeps the tone and meaning consistent with the claim that working together can open up limitless potential for the future.

For the second blank, “No future” creates a stark, concrete consequence of not taking personal part in the effort: if there is no individual involvement, there will be no future to worry about. That abrupt contrast—an unlimited future when we act collectively, versus no future at all without individual effort—lands as a memorable warning and reinforces the contrast between the two clauses.

Other word options would disrupt the flow or shift the meaning. For example, shifting to a different form of involvement or a different scope changes the sense of who is involved or what is at stake; phrasing like “plenty to worry about” would not pair as cleanly with the idea of no future. The chosen pair preserves parallel structure and delivers a concise, impactful message.