History suggests that the leadership traits of leaders can definitely affect the value system of the group of people they lead. For example, we can see the strong leadership of President Zelensky and how it is actually boosting the morale of his people and inspiring others to join the fight against Russia. Articles state that Zelensky will not stop fighting for his people, “they will never be “slaves” to Russia”. Normal civilians are learning how to use weapons as well as other people outside of the country with combat experience. This proves my point because his bravery and loyalty to his country have given confidence and hope to his people, and inspired them and others to fight back. This demonstrates how the traits of a leader can affect the group of people being led.
|
On the flip side, it can also be said that the leadership traits of a leader donʻt represent or affect the people at all, or at least enough of them. This is evident in the protest being held by the Russian people against the war with Ukraine, people asking for peace and to leave their “brother country” alone. This supports my claim because even though Putin is a very violent and mercenary leader many people have been brave a chose to speak about his decisions regarding to Ukraine. There was an instance where a crew member of a news show in Russia held up a sign saying “no war” knowing that they would get fired or even worse. The evidence presented in this paragraph as well as the first shows how leadership traits can both affect and oppose the value system of the led people.
|
During the Middle Ages, Europe was going through a dark period. There was less trade and cultural advances. As well as a “devolution from empire to localism” (CrashCourse, 2012). The social system was feudalism, which pretty much operated in a pyramid with lords/landowners at the top. Then, below would be their knights who would do the protecting and pledge loyalty to the landowners. On the bottom, there were the peasants that worked in exchange for protection.
Therefore, it can be argued that having land would be beneficial and used to gain power in this period. For instance, CrashCourse states "Power tends to flow into the hands of local lords who can protect the peasants better than the state can". This shows that landowners heavily benefitted from the system. Since landowners had the resources (which was ʻāina) to protect the people from different threats they could acquire power over them. Of course, they also profited off of their workers who would keep the land by farming and so on. this situation would be impacted by leadership character traits because unless the lords were heartfelt and genuine towards the peasants they probably wouldn’t exploit them just to remain rich. With all this, it is shown that those who had land could benefit from it and use it to gain power in the middle ages. |
The geographical location of yourself and your community has an impact on your resources because certain plants or foods can only be grown in certain climates. This impacts the way a civilization evolves and behaves towards other groups because the civilization has to rely on the resources they have but they might also want/need the resources of other people. A prime example of geography impacting your group is in Wadi Halfa, Sudan where they only receive 2.54mm of rain which is less than one inch per year. With rain not falling people have suffered as their crops won’t grow and water has become very valuable. In order to get water for their families they need to purchase water from neighboring areas where water is more accessible. In conclusion, the location of Wadi Halfa has led their people to suffer due to the lack of fresh water.
|