Hi, please grade my essay on “Are many leaders are necessary for a group of people to function properly?”
I agree with the claim that many leaders are necessary for a group of people to function properly.
For a certain society to burgeon into prosperity and parity, it is prudent that it is led by a capable authority. However, if a single person were in control, he/she will be susceptible to corruption.
Consider Adolf Hitler. As soon as he gained power in the German Government, he imposed martial law, established dictatorship, and assumed sole leadership of the nation. With no one else in the government to oppose, question or regulate his actions, he evoked a genocide against the Jews, and precipitated World War 2. Hitler was an utterly corrupt opportunist and was consumed with absolutism.
On the contrary, there is democracy. Take for example, India where there are several different political parties jockeying for control. The government is divided into the ruling party and the opposition. If the ruling party were to propose a bill or put forward a law to pass through the parliament, it would first have to face criticism and receive pointers by the ruling party. So, if a single person were to attempt to impose his/her decision, his decision simply cannot run unopposed.
If we were to skim the pages of literature, we can easily spot some pieces which are opponents of autocracy. Take for instance, Animal Farm by George Orwell which revolves around a group of animals who overthrow the humans to create a society or “Animal Farm” where no one is oppressed. However, as soon as the ruthless Napoleon assumes leadership, he becomes as great a despot as the humans who were ousted. He never showed any interest in the well being of the farm, only in the strength of his power on it. His uncontested leadership engenders the farm to turn into a society trenched with disparity.
Hence, the three examples listed justify my argument that for any society to function properly, shared power is imperative.