Do you believe that people want/desire a strong person leading them in terms of national leadership? Or would they rather have someone that they can get rid of when they want and then set up for themselves a new person to lead them? Please explain your thoughts.
I believe that people would rather have a person who they can get rid of when they can. The reason is because not everyone will like the decisions that the person has made in their time of leading. They can also use this to get someone better and with more idea of what they are doing for the betterment of the country. I know that not everyone will agree on what they person leading is doing, but that way they can get someone that will do what they feel is right for the country. That is why I believe that people would rather choose a person who they can get rid of.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm kind of on the fence on this issue. I believe that people want both in different ways. Ideally, I think everyone likes a good hero, a leader they can all respect and talk nicely about. My example would be President Kennedy. Everyone thought he was pretty much the greatest thing since sliced bread. People would fawn over how hardworking, respectable, and family-oriented he was. He was seen as a great leader, and people were more proud than ever to be Americans because of it. However, since most times situations don't end up working out ideally, I believe people also desire someone to get rid of when they can. For this, I'll use the Cuban Missile Crisis. Although people were still proud of their president during this time, had Kennedy not been able to negotiate as well as he did, the people would have pretty much just wanted him completely taken out of a leadership position as soon as possible. They would have wanted him replaced by someone they picked to be adequate for getting them out of the situation. I guess I believe it kind of ties into people's tendency toward selfishness. Of course during a time of crisis, selfishness would become more prominent due to the want to survive. This would bring out the side of people who wanted to have control and get rid of the leader when he no longer did what they wanted. So I guess I believe that the answer is both in a way. It just depends on the situation.
ReplyDeleteI believe that people would rather have someone that they can get rid of when they can and set up for themselves a new person to lead them. I think this because people like to know that they are being ruled fairly. They also like to feel like they are somewhat in control. So if people aren't satisfied with how a leader is running things then they can just replace that leader with a new one. So even though they give up some of their rights o have someone else in charge they still like the right to be in control of who rules over them.
ReplyDeleteIn my personal opinion, I think that the common person wants a strong person leading them. Many people would be willing to put up with some minor inconveniences or laws that they did not agree with in order to have a safe place to live. Also, many people don't will follow their leaders without question, as long as their daily routine stays intact. When a leader is constantly replaced, the people have to remain responsible for their decisions regarding electing new leaders, and many people wouldn't care about who their leader is as long as they're safe and their daily lives go uninterrupted.
ReplyDeleteI think having a stronger leader for the people would be the best for the country or kingdom. Cause with a leader maybe calling all the shots for the kingdom, but does have to balance the power and authority. But I think that it real comes down to the people. The people have the more power I think cause without the people there is no ruler. The people allow the leader to lead them. And if they feel uncomfortable or feel that he/she are not doing their job to the right creditability. They remove them and replace them with someone who has good leadership. I also think having a back plan when having a leader cause; if the leader does go unwisely are their decisions. The people can have an impact in their new assigned leader. And get rid of the leader and find another one. So I think that the people do have a saying when it comes to their appointed leader.
ReplyDeleteI think that people don't want a strong person leading people in terms of national leadership but, would rather then have someone that they can get rid of when they can get rid of when they can and set up for themselves a new person to lead them. I think this because people can cling to a strong person for security and all responsibility would go back to that person. As long as people can still limit the power of this person this type of government would work. If the person becomes a dictator and the people do not like this person there may a major rebellion. On the other hand if the leader is weak and people can choose the person the country may be attacked others and fall at the hand of the leaders. Some pros to this is that if they want to change the leader they have to power and if they want try to reelect another person they could but would they make the correct decisions? No one knows. Thats why I think a the people would elect a strong leader and he would protect the country and if he doesn't meet the standards of the people he can be switched.
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't know how people used to think, but I know that personally, I would prefer a strong (and intelligent) leader. Despite the apparent abnormally large number of "dictators" in our classroom, I believe that most people honestly just want direction. In other words, most people are followers. I'm sure there may have been a few who had enough power to appoint a "weak" leader who they could at any time dispose of and replace with a ruler whom they could easily manipulate. However, I honestly doubt that most people have enough power or intelligence to intentionally appoint a leader they plan to get rid of.
ReplyDeleteI think that people want a strong leader that they can have confidence in rather than a leader that can eventually be overthrown. I don't think that people would want to go into a position with power just to think that they could be overthrown and then that person eventually get overthrown and so on and so on. Although many people have strong leadership roles, only very few know how to apply them in a positive way and I think that people would rather have someone who knows how to apply them so they have a good leader to follow.
ReplyDeleteI believe that people of this time want a strong leader that will make them feel safe and live in a successful country. I mean I get why people would want someone that they can just get rid of, but most people today would want someone strong. Countries that may be corrupt would probably want someone they can just get rid of because they've seen so many methods of past leaders not work. They want to be the one to prove and to show their nation that they have the ability to be the leader that will make them no longer corrupt. Having a strong leader is much more important than getting rid of leaders and having so many different ones. Yay for Strong Leaders!!!
ReplyDeleteI would definitely prefer a strong leader. Although a weak leader would be easy to replace if needed, it would also be an open invitation for other kingdoms to try and take over. A strong leader would protect the kingdom and maintain order. It doesn't matter too much if the leader is well liked, as long as he/she maintains order within the kingdom. People also tend to look towards a stronger leader in times of trouble.
ReplyDeleteTeresita- I see your point. People just want to be able to get rid of their leader if they are not doing a good job, but this is why I would think that people want a strong leader so they don't have to worry about the strong leader doing so many things that are stupid that they would have to find another one.
ReplyDeleteSam-You are so right. Even having a strong leader, there will be inconveniences which is something i forgot to mention.
People will majority *say* that they want a strong person they can get rid of. Mainly because if a majority of people don't agree with the words or actions of the leader, it's easier to overthrow that leader. However, people will *want* a person with a strong sense of leadership to lead them, but they most likely won't speak up. In my opinion, I would want a person who has a balance of both. But, not necessarily someone whose a pushover and whose leadership tactics are influenced by the negative perceptions of others. If this were the case and the person would let him or herself be overthrown, then maybe they weren't strong enough in the first place to lead a group of people. As much as we may want to deny it, we all want a strong leader to lead us in life (government and politics, etc.), even though problems and arguments are inevitable. But, the world is not perfect. Problems come and go, and come again.
ReplyDeleteI think that people want as strong leader that they can impeach or get rid of when the time's right. I think that this would be the best for a nation and the people would want this because then the ruler couldn't have too much power and he or she would make the right decisions for the nations so he wouldn't get impeached. I think that it is important for a person to have power under the ruler and if the person didn't have the right to get rid of the ruler, they would have no say in the government. Having a strong leader who had limited power over the people would be best so it didn't turn into a dictatorship.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the probable ratio of politicians to non-politicians throughout the world, it is obvious that there is a significantly higher number of non-politicians. These non-politicians obviously have less power to influence any type of higher position to any great extent. Therefore, I believe most people would want the individual with the highest position of importance in their society to be a strong and intelligent leader. One can assume this because those who do not have the capability to impact society themselves don't want a foolish and ignorant leader. This leader would be able to provide logical and effective methods to problems and concerns of society. The select few people who would probably desire a leader that could be easily eliminated for whatever reason would only be those who are in position to gain something for themselves, as opposed to the people of society, by the removing of the leader.
ReplyDeleteTeresita,
ReplyDeleteI think you have a good point, but I would have to disagree with you. I think people would rather have a leader that they could follow so they wouldn't have to worry about an unfair ruler.
Jessica,
I agree with you. Although we have many good, strong voices that would be good leaders, it is nice to have someone to follow that people are confident in. Why have a bad ruler that we kind of already know that we could overthrow anyway?
I think people would want a little of both. Having a strong person would help you a ton in the sense that they will take no crap, and ideally would do what is best for the country or what ever the situation is. On the other hand, having a leader that would be easy to switch for a stronger person would be nice. In some cases when you have one strong person, they might forget what is best for the country and they start a dictatorship. When having a person you can change, you can easily do it with having to go through much trouble. Personally, i would love to have a happy medium. Having a dictator would suck, but having a real weak leader would also suck. I think that in the U.S we have the right amount of power for both the president and the people.
ReplyDeleteSam... As long as people can live their lives in safety, then they'll be content. That's what I got from your blog, and I agree. If they had to keep replacing leaders all the time, there would be no normal life and they'd have to adjust all the time to the new leaders.
ReplyDeleteDiana... It is true that not everyone is going to like decisions that a leader makes, but what if those decisions are for the better good? It's like the relationship between adults and children. Kids don't want to do stuff all the time, like go to school. They don't agree with decisions that leaders made for them. However, it is a good decision that will help children out in the future. The point im trying to make is that most decisions a leader makes are for the betterment of the people, and doesn't make them a bad leader.
Deep- I agree with your comment because I think that if a leader had too much power and it turned into a dictatorship, they can't get rid of their leader which would result in a rebellion. This would be even worse than having a ruler that had shared power by having the people being able to get rid of him. Great job!
ReplyDeleteKeyli- Good job, I see you're point. I think that a leader should be strong so people like then. However, it would be scary if they got so much power because how would you get rid of them?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSerg,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree, the people would want a medium situation were the leader is not a weak but not to strong were they can become a dictator. And i also agree with were you state that the U.S. has the right amount of power for both the president and the citizen's.
Syd,
I agree how that, the leader could be impeached if needed and having a strong leader with limited power would be best so that their would be no room for dictatorship.
The people want a strong leader to lead them, but they would also probably want a leader that is easy to manipulate. Someone that if they don't do what the people want could be disposed of easily. I would like a leader that is strong but has a weak side at the same time. That if he doesn't give the people what they want he can be disposed of and a new stronger wiser leader can replace him and someone who can actually give the people what the people want.
ReplyDeleteFrom my point of view, it depends on the type of people that the nation are. For example, if the people have suffered through a violent ruler who abused the nation, they would want a strong person to lead them. They would want a person who could restore peace to the nation, yet who they could trust to be loyal to the country and only have interests of benefitting the country itself. In other words, they would prefer the first type of leader because the leader would "save" them, as well as the nation.
ReplyDeleteAlex,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on how the people allow the leader to lead them. True, there needs to be a balance on the leader and everyone else so that the leader doesn't make decisions all on his own. This is where many leaders go bad because they have no one to restrict their power and they start doing things for their own benefit.
In terms of national leadership, I think most people want someone who will be great and strong leader for our country but I also think that people want to have the power to get rid of someone and let someone else lead if they are not content with what the leader was doing. I want a great leader for our nation but I know that not every decision he makes will agree with my beliefs. Looking back on the previous election, it seemed like most people voted for Obama not because of his beliefs and purpose but because of his race (black-no offense). In my opinion, he is not a strong leader but thats just me.
ReplyDeleteI myself would want a strong person to lead the nation. I believe that most people would also desire a strong leader. A weak leader would make the nation appear weak. This in turn could lead to threats of other nations wanting to take this particular one over. Although a weak leader could be easily manipulated by those under him or her the majority of the population are common people and they most likely wouldn't be able to influence the leader directly anyway. Having a strong leader will make your nation strong or at least appear strong which could reduce the threat of being taken over. So it is important to have a strong leader but not let them ever have absolute power.
ReplyDeleteSergio,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with what you said. The way I see this is like if we have a President and we really don't like what he is doing or he does something really stupid then impeachment may happen. It would be nice to replace someone who isn't doing so great with a person who might do a better job. Great job :)
Isabel-- I agree with your post. It does ultimately depend on the people of the nation. In contrast to your example if the people of the nation were all just interested in bettering themselves and not the good of the nation they would probably want a weak leader that they could easily manipulate.
ReplyDeleteKevin-- I also agree with your post. I believe that a strong leader would make for a stronger nation. The strong leader would also be better to maintain order within the nation even in a time of crisis.
Carlos,
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very interesting how you said people would want someone they could manipulate. I never thought of it like it but that's exactly what it seems like most people want. Not everybody is going to be happy so it's important that most of the people agree on something even though there will be those who disagree. Great post!! :)
Deep - After reading your comment to this week's question, I realized there were a lot of points that I disagreed with. First off, in my personal opinion, having someone as a leader who can later be overthrown pretty much means that that person wasn't strong enough to lead people in the first place. But, that is my own opinion. Of course, I also agreed with some of the other things you said. I agree that there might be some major rebellion but, like I mentioned in my post, there are always going to be problems. Good post.
ReplyDeleteTeresita - There were more points of your post that I agreed with rather than disagreed. People would like to know that they are being ruled fairly, but this is not always the case. Often, leaders will just make their followers think that fairness has a role in being ruled to avoid any revolts or rebellion. It is true that people want to be somewhat in control of who rules them. This makes them think that they have a say in what goes on. Good post.
In terms of national leadership, I think that people desire a powerful leader that knows how to keep the country in success. Also I would think that people want a leader who knows how to deal with crisis when they come. For instance I think that mexico desires a stronger leader that knows how to control certain things.
ReplyDeleteI believe people want a strong person leading them in terms of national leadership. They would rather have someone who knows what they are doing than someone who doesn't. Being able to get rid of them when they want would cause a lot more conflicts between the people. Some would say the leader is great others would say no and want them out. Either way everyone is never going to agree and be happy. There will be happy people, mad people, and people who don't really care. Having a strong leader makes most people feel like they can rely on them and be somewhat safe as to how the leader more than likely knows how to keep everything under control.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first read this question I couldn’t really pick one over the other. I think people want and need both for a leader. As a person of high power, people will seek him/her to protect them and keep order in their country. Hopefully the leader will be loyal to the followers and listen to them. But I’m guessing people will go the easy way. People would rather get rid of and get a new leader. One reason people in high power are easy scapegoats. Once something goes wrong it’s easy to place blame on them. In that case when the person in power does something wrong, replace them.
ReplyDeleteSally,
ReplyDeleteI like how you pointed out Obama. I have to agree with you. I personally didn't think he would be a good president and thought like you that people voted for him because of his race. The people wanted someone who they thought would feel i guess "compassion" for them and understand them better. With everything else I also think that people want somewhat a little of both; a strong leader, yet someone they can get rid of.
Diana,
Yes, the people would like to feel like they are somewhat in control, but I think they would also want a strong leader. They would like someone they can depend on in a hard situation, as well as get rid of when they aren't content with their ruling or system. Many people like to have control over the decisions they make and that are made for them. Well actually I think they just like to have more of a say. There isn't really a way to control whether the leader is going to be strong or not and not everyone is going to agree. Its just a part of everyone having to put aside some of their beliefs to be able to agree better.
Well of course the obvious answer would be someone who is weak and that they are able to control and throw out of office when they want. The thing is that they also want a strong leader so that they will be able to have the protection for them as well. In reality it has to be a combination of the two. The people want to be able to control a somewhat strong person. They also want to have somewhat of a mutual agreement with them so that they can have their influence on the country as well so that they can make the rules too.
ReplyDeleteKeyli,
ReplyDeleteYoure right on wanting a strong leader. If a country is so corrupt, its because they switch leaders so much. Its like in football, when a team sucks and they switch offensive coordinator every year, their offense will never get a feel for what they can do.
Sam, Youre very right. When having a strong leader, youre going to have a couple of things you dont agree with, but i think people would sacrifice that for having a safe place.
Well it's hard to say, but if leader is too powerful, then it's good for the country. But if their are certain people who want to control and overpower the leader, then it's obvious you want someone who isn't too much of a problem. You don't want a weak leader though, because then you'll will see the people start to revolt or argue against their leader. I believe it is wise to have someone who can has a quality of have power over people and has good leadership, but also you want someone whom he can trust and over time use him for your own will. It's definitely a hard choice, but I believe a leader more in the middle will work best. Kind of like when we were trying to start a government with our class, when we were stranded in the island. Kevin was brilliant, by kind of being sneaky and appearing to be the good guy =D.
ReplyDeleteHugo: I agree with you Hugo, if you have someone with too much power, you won't be able to control him, but if he/she is too weak, that person will be overthrown by other people and it's citizens will revolt.
ReplyDeleteSergio: It's probably best to have a leader who is in the middle, I agree with you Sergio, because yes, if you have someone with too much power, he/she could become obsess with power, and a weak leader is good, but you can switch that person out if he/she is doing a poor job of running the country. But when switching leaders, it can cause a disturbance and disrupt the balance of the country. You have SOO many leaders, but a thing to remember is that every leader thinks and kind of has a different view of their religion, even though they practice the same religion. So because of this, I believe is where the country starts to fall apart.
Isabel,
ReplyDeleteYou have a good point. Most people want a ruler who wants the best for the country, and it would be very sad to have an abusive ruler.
Laura,
ReplyDeleteIt would be easy to got that way but the rulers are not going to be perfect at everything and people are going to keep on getting rid of them.
Laura - I really like your belief about people choosing the easy way and picking one to get rid of. Everyone likes a leader until he/she does something wrong. Then everyone just kind of rips them apart.
ReplyDeleteSally - I think you're right about wanting a strong leader, but also not agreeing with his decisions and wanting him gone. People always seem to want the best of both worlds, but it never seems to work out quite that way.
I think that people as a rule wish for both. However this is both impractical and unattainable. In my opinion people truly want a strong leader. As shown through the experiment that we did in class. Most people believe in a leader, not necessarily a sharing of power. A strong leader gives the country or city the appearance of strength. People are less likely to try to harm a country with a strong leader for fear of the repercussions. A strong leader would truly be able to unite his people and move towards their betterment.
ReplyDeleteDeep: Through you make a compelling argument, I cannot fully agree with everything you said. With a weak leader, the nation in turn appears weak. Who respects a weak nation? They would be subject to ridicule and terrorist threats.
ReplyDeleteLaura - I liked that you added that leader are scapegoats. I think you are very right. We blame them for everything but, sometimes they have very little they can do. Great comment
ReplyDeleteWelcome to the class and the blog
Carlos,
ReplyDeleteI like the way you stated your response. The word "manipulate" describes exactly what people want to do when they elect a leader. No matter what they want the outcome to be, they still want to be able to mold their leader into who they want him to be and manipulate the leader to do what they want he or she to do.
Madi: I agree with your opinion very much. People need a strong leader, although they also need new leaders often so that over time more of the people are appeased with the leaders' different viewpoints.
ReplyDeleteDiana: If people put a person that they can easily get rid of in charge of the government, how can that leader be trusted with handling important issues? Wouldn't the leader have to be less intelligent than the common people? If the leader was, then I'd be afraid of the decisions that they'd try to make.
Hugo,
ReplyDeleteAlthough it would be nice to have a combination of a leader is both strong but can be easily overthrown, I do not believe that is realistic at all. A strong leader, is also and intelligent leader. An intelligent leader knows how to maintain their power. With that said, that strong, intelligent leader probably realizes that the people are going to want to be influential to their country, and thus he or she would be sure to somehow please them. The contradictions of the two sides are too distinct to be put together.
Katherine,
I am in strong agreement with your post. No powerful country is going to be led by a weak front runner. Because most citizens would want to be apart of a powerful country, it can be predicted that they would desire a leader who could provide this.
Isabel- In response to my response. That's the whole point, you want the majority to elect a leader in order for the manipulation to work. For the minority of those who disagree then you must either manipulate them or take care of them.
ReplyDeleteHugo: I agree, you need a strong leader but you also need a weak one. One in the middle, a person easily manipulated by his people, but not by others. Someone who can be overthrown if he/she is a bad leader but is strong enough to fight off others.
Teresita-
ReplyDeleteYou are true about how people want to know what kind of person they are ruling. I agree with you because weather they like the person leading them or not, everyone will just be willing to choose the right person to be leading them. You stated a good point on how people would like to be ruled fairly.
Deep-
It is true that people do want a strong leader but at the same time they would not like it if the strong leader became stronger and was a dictator. Its true that people would rather have someone that they can replace. In my point of view.
Olivia
ReplyDeleteI'm just going to go out and say that you made a good point against me saying that their is too much of a fine line for a ruler to be considered balanced out. Also the belief that having a strong leader would have to be an ideal choice due to the fact that a weak leader would pose a great risk to the people and himself. Nice job catching my little flaw.
Katherine,
You have made a good point that people would desire a ruler that has the capabilities of being a "medium" ruler even though it is somewhat impossible. Another statement you made that was important was that you said that the people would want a leader who takes charge and that is important because I wouldn't want a leader who cares about only himself and his groupies don't do anything for everybody else. Good job.
Kevin- I would prefer a weak leader. I understand that they can easily be replaced, but the people have a choice in which a powerful leader can be weak at the same time. I see your point in which you state that other countries can overthrow. This is another point I would like to address a weak leader can also have a very strong standing army to defend himself.I also think that a strong leader can make stupid decisions and mess up the countries. They can also become dictators and power can go to their head and would have the chance of killing Innocent people.Good Argument.
ReplyDeleteDiana- Agree with what you have to say. I to would choose to have a weak leader just for the fact that they can be kicked out. I would want the people to choose a smart powerful leader.I agree that people would want to change leaders that make bad decisions.There are also plus sides to have a strong leader such as they can protect their countries. People would also listen to them in fear or respect. Good Job.
Madi: I do not agree with you. People would totally rather have a leader that they can replace at any time. That is why Presidents are elected like every four years, so that we can replace them then if we want to. I would have liked if you used more examples in your paragraph but it was good overal! Great Job!
ReplyDeleteKatherine: Yes people may want a strong leader but what they really want is someone that they can replace easily in case they don't like that leader. As I said above that is why we only have a President for four years, so that we can replace him or her easily. Also if we wanted to we can impeach that leader. It's just what the people want more. You did a great Job though!
Olivia
ReplyDelete- I strongly agree with your post. While there may be some people who would want a weak leader, or at least an easy way to get rid the leader, these people remain few in number. A weak leader would mean a weak nation, and would not only be easily taken over by those within the nation, but by other countries as well.
Deep
- I disagree with your post. You say that people would prefer to have a leader they could easily dispose of, but you forget to mention that this leader is weak. For example, Deep, during a presidential campaign, do you honestly think that people would vote for the "weaker" of the two candidates? The average people of a nation do not have the power to appoint a new leader, so why would they chose a weak one? If your leader was strong, then why would there be a need to "get rid of him/her?" Also, I would think that people would be more likely to rebel against a weak and inept leader, than a strong leader.
Kelli… I agree with you. People do want a bit of both sides. That way a leader doesn’t have full control over a country, and the people’s voices are heard.
ReplyDeleteSergio… I have also thought about your comment. Leaders may get caught up with their own power and end up with a dictatorship without intentionally doing it. I would also be with in the happy medium to have a balanced government.