▶ Your Answer : Probably almost
all students in a country, in their social studies or history class, have
learned from their teachers that tyranny or communism naturally leads to inevitable
failure. This is because the leaders of such administration had been given unlimited
power to dominate over the legislation or the entire society. History has also
proven that the central tenet of democracy, in which the major power is
exercised by the citizens and the power by the rulers are always checked and
balanced by the people, has been undeniably successful in creating a healthier
and affluent society. For these reasons, I believe that people respect their
rulers most when the rulers are given minimal right to exercise power.
Excessive
power endowed upon the rulers has always led to the demise of the nation’s
economy. A great example of such phenomenon is the North Korean regime ruled by
the tyrant Jung-Eun Kim. As a communist country, it bans external trade with
the countries adjacent to its border and focuses only on magnifying its
military powers. Power is so centralized and dominated by the Communist Party
that every single attempt to democratize the sullen society has been countered
by purging and homicide. The North Koreans are forced to respect their ruler
and if they do not, they are banished to jail or eradicated. Chairman Kim and
his predecessor’s greed toward the throne that gives unlimited power has turned
the North Korean community from a socialist one to a country notoriously known
for its isolation and autocracy. If the chairman pays its only attention to
retaining his power, it would lead the North Korean society to further chaos,
and the gap between the poor and the selected elite will become considerably
larger. The people from other normal countries criticize Chairman Kim for his obsession
toward power, and do not respect him as a good leader.
In
contrast to the tyranny by North Korea, consider the democratic,
freedom-oriented South Korea. Here, democracy and the constitution clearly
border and guideline the limitation that should be abided by the president, its
government, legislation, congress and jurisdiction. Since there were enough yield
of power, democracy bloomed in South Korea as a successful administration that guaranteed
freedom of speech, want, and religion for its constituents to enjoy. The
president, though the most powerful position in the South Korea, is not an omnipotent
figure like that in the North, but it is checked and balanced by the collective
power accumulated by the normal people, whether or not the person is old,
young, man or woman. People have freedom to evaluate the policies and changes being
lead by the president’s propaganda and if it is seemed that the president or his/her
government officers are abusing his/her power, it is immediately met by protest
or any form of disagreement that can help stabilize the society. Within democracy,
every person’s voice and right are important and the constraints in wielding power
allow the society to become more transparent and healthier.
We
have seen that if exceptional power is given to the ruler, it leads to a
corrupt society that cannot be salvaged by the actions of the normal people.
The two contrasting examples, the North and South Koreas, have shown that there
is a striking difference between a country that do not refrain or refrain from
exercising power. When a ruler yields some amount of power that has been mandated
by the law of a country, it will be viewed favorable by his or her people, in
which it proves that the voices and opinion of the ordinary can also be heard without
any societal constraints. Thus, people, in turn, will meet their ruler’s wise decision
with gratitude and outmost respect. |