In a free country, the man who reaches the position of leader is usually one of outstanding character and ability. Moreover, it is usually possible to foresee that he will reach such a position, since early in life one can see his qualities of character. But this, is not always true in the case of a dictator, often he reaches his position of power through chance, very often through the unhappy state of his country.

Correct Option (D)

The passage explicitly states that a dictator often reaches a position of power "through the unhappy state of his country." This directly implies that conditions of despair, political instability, or an unhappy national situation can create an environment conducive to the rise of a dictatorship.

Incorrect Options:

The passage indicates that the qualities of a leader in a free country are often discernible early in life, making their eventual rise to leadership "foreseeable" by observers. However, it does not state that the leader himself possesses the ability to foresee his future position. This option misinterprets the predictability of a leader's character and ability as the leader's own foresight.

The passage contrasts leaders in free countries with dictators, implying that dictators also hold leadership positions, albeit through different mechanisms (chance, unhappy state of the country). It does not claim that leadership roles exist exclusively within free countries, only that the type of leader and their path to power differ significantly.

The passage highlights that an "unhappy state" or despair in a country can be a contributing factor to the rise of a dictator. It describes a cause-and-effect relationship where national despair can lead to dictatorship, but it does not prescribe a duty for a leader to actively ensure the country is free from despair. The focus is on the conditions that facilitate a dictator's ascent, not on a leader's obligation to prevent such conditions.