Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The style of leader
The means of gaining and maintaining power has been a topic widely debated throughout history, yet there is no definitive answer to how a ruler gains and maintains power. Debates about who makes the best leader have continued from the beginning of time and are even extremely relevant in today's world. Gaining and maintaining power requires more than just one magic word, but hard work, and the continued support of the people. Throughout many examples, it can be proven that rulers gain power through the support of the people. To gain the support of the population, one should prove that they have the best ideas, show that they are the most qualified, and display that they represent the people. To achieve the support of the general population, it is crucial that a ruler shows that they have the best ideas compared to the other candidates. A prime example …show more content…
When somebody shows that they understand what the public needs and wants, they are going to be able to gain and maintain power much more easily than someone who doesn't understand what the people have been through and what they need. An example of this can be found in Scotland. Ross Finnie is a rural farmer running to become a congressperson in his town. Since the people in the area know Finnie and know that like them, he is a farmer, he has been gaining tremendous support (“Gaining…” P 1). If someone ran for congress that had never farmed and didn’t understand the needs of the people, nobody would support him, and chances are that he wouldn't gain power. In this case, however, Finnie understands the needs of the people in his town and has gained their support. With support from the people, an unlikely candidate is able to gain and maintain power even though they might not have the experience of someone who has ruled before. Having the same ideas as the people has helped Finnie gain and maintain
For instance, Menand writes, “The fraction of the electorates that responds to substantive political argument is hugely outweighed by the fraction that responds to slogans, misinformation...random personal association.” Mass voters mostly pursue the wrong or irrelevant information that are irrelevant to the election; thus lead them to vote for the candidates which they do not really want. Their choices mostly lack rationalities. Many voters who are slightly informative think that they are participating in a certain issue and considering the value of the candidates; yet most of them do not have adequate information and knowledge in understanding the meaning of political terms. Voters lack judgment on their government and candidates, their minds are easily being brainwashed by a small amount of people who has informative approaches in participating governmental issue, and affect their
They choose their kings for their noble birth, their leaders for their valour. The power even of the kings is not absolute or arbitrary. As for the leaders, it is their example rather than theirauthority that wins them special admiration(7.1).
However, seldom is this the case with American politics. There are far fewer politicians then there are low class workers or unemployed, and yet these politicians decide upon most all of the important decisions the country is faced with. The only time the rest of the people are involved is when these politicians spew out money and promises in an attempt to gain the p...
Although it is often argued that rulers such as Joseph II, Catherin II, and Frederick II were motivated to instate enlightened principles; oftentimes, these rulers were slaves to the ideals of despotism, where the preeminent goal was to obtain more power. Indeed it may be a legitimate claimed that these rulers realized the greatness of Enlightenment ideas; however, since most of their reigns were spent preserving dominance over their people, it is safe to say that these individuals may have been more dedicated to serving their own self-interests.
There are always people who, in a group, come out with better qualities to be a leader than others. The strongest people however, become the greater influences which the others decide to follow. However, sometimes the strongest person is not the best choice. Authors often show how humans select this stronger person to give an understanding of the different powers that people can posses over others.
A longstanding debate in human history is what to do with power and what is the best way to rule. Who should have power, how should one rule, and what its purpose should government serve have always been questions at the fore in civilization, and more than once have sparked controversy and conflict. The essential elements of rule have placed the human need for order and structure against the human desire for freedom, and compromising between the two has never been easy. It is a question that is still considered and argued to this day. However, the argument has not rested solely with military powers or politicians, but philosophers as well. Two prominent voices in this debate are Plato and Machiavelli, both of whom had very different ideas of government's role in the lives of its people. For Plato, the essential service of government is to allow its citizens to live in their proper places and to do the things that they are best at. In short, Plato's government reinforces the need for order while giving the illusion of freedom. On the other hand, Machiavelli proposes that government's primary concern is to remain intact, thereby preserving stability for the people who live under it. The feature that both philosophers share is that they attempt to compromise between stability and freedom, and in the process admit that neither can be totally had.
The most difficult thing for a regime to achieve is that of acquiring the best ruler, with the consent of the ruled. Aristotle acknowledges this in his works The Politics, and Caius Marcius Coriolanus faces this difficult task in the Shakespeare play The Tragedy of Coriolanus. We even see this same difficult task arise in contemporary politics, as the masses are wooed one way or the other with sound bites, and talk show appearances, by candidates who may not be the best leader for the republic. To this day I don't know if there is a real solution for this dilemma. There is, however, a better way to go about seeking the consent of the ruled then the route Coriolanus took, and there is a good way to go about achieving a threshold in our republic where we better our chances so that those who Know have the consent of those who do not Know, so that the common good can be achieved.
Since the beginning of the sixteenth century, Western Europe experienced multiple types of rulers which then led to the belief that rulers should be a combination of leadership types. Some rulers were strong, some weak, and some were considered to rule as tyrants. All of these were versions of absolutism which gave kings absolute power over their provinces and countries. Over time kings began to believe that their supreme power was given to them by God in a belief known as Divine Right. The people looked at Divine Right kings as those who would incorporate God’s will into their politics; however, many kings took this power and turned it into tyrannical opportunities. By the time the seventeenth century came around, kings continued to believe in Divine Right and absolute power which continued to create many tyrannical kings and caused many of the people to begin to fight the king’s power by granting some rights to the people. These uprisings led to more people believing that they have certain rights that the king cannot ignore. By the eighteenth century, many rulers started to combine their absolute power with including the newly granted rights of the people. The belief also shifted from Divine Right to one that the people gave the king his power which led to kings like Frederick II of Prussia to rule with his people’s interests in mind.
In history, governments have endeavored to rule their subjects. Major forms of authority consist primarily of monarchy, absolute monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny, theocracy, and republic. By examining the main faults of each government, the republic is clearly the superior form.
When a private individual becomes a ruler, he will need both his inner skills and a good chance to show them. The relationship of fortune and the virtù will bring him the success. Without a chance, the skills will not find a way to show them while gaining the power, and without the skills, given chance can not be used effectively for a long time.
The want for acceptance and the need to be liked are natural desires within human nature, especially within political context. Politicians are often criticized for bending their beliefs and making different promises to different groups, often even contrasting in their ultimate goal, but is there really another option? In order to win an election and maintain power, one must win the support of the majority of the constituent. In order to do so, he must sacrifice some of his own goals and thoughts to become what the people want, what the median voter wants; he must become who they want to represent them, who they want in office, and, most immediately, for whom they want to vote. Only by taking on this median voter approach on some scale, can a candidate even hope to become more than a candidate.
How to become a successful and strong leader? What are essential characteristics that are imperative to become one? These questions were asked many centuries ago, as well as they are asked today. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote one of the most influential treatises on leadership that is still utilized in politics and management today. One of the defining conceptions he explores is locating a balance between being virtuous and righteous and practicing carefully selected deceit and cunning. Gilgamesh’s exhibition of leadership is much more primordial and archetypal, which is the product of different eras, where the notions of power and the state were at opposite ends of a spectrum, as were the structures that organize people. Although Gilgamesh fulfills most of the characteristics of Machiavelli’s definition of a strong leader, who is feared, has power and support of his comrades; he still has to improve his public image, which happens throughout his journey.
Niccoló Machiavelli claims in “The Qualities of the Prince” that a prince must have certain qualities that will allow him to seize and maintain his power as a ruler. Machiavelli asserts that these qualities will guarantee the ruler to be able to govern his subjects effectively. According to him, a prince must study the art of war, must understand generosity and to what extent he must be generous to be effective, must choose to either be loved or feared, and be able to keep his word to his citizens according to the situation. These qualities can still apply in today’s politics, and will be useful for a modern time politician as long as they are used carefully.
Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli have spent their lives in assertion of which form of government is good and who should be ruler, what type of ...
Politics is the means for attaining valued things. Although, valued things are different in every society, the means of securing those things has never changed. The competition for power, authority and influence will always be the backbone of politics. Applying power, authority and influence to the valued things that support the public good, will produce the quality of life a society desires. In the present day, citizens in the United States demand certain valued things such as welfare, education, safe streets and healthcare. Through politics, citizens can apply their power in many different ways to get the things they want. Power is the ability to get someone to do something they may or may not want to do. Through the use of or the application of coercion, persuasion, manipulation and negotiation, power is used to influence the system.