Today certain events happened (that I won't name in a public domain) that I felt really demonstrated or rather further elaborated on our country's definition of democracy. Now theoretically, it should be "the principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community". Yet, a certain caste system still remains in our society, shown by the very "we're right you're wrong" idealogy that the education and military industry adapt. Although people are seemingly moving on towards giving the youth (the "un-authority") fair rights, could it be that society will always remain this way? Personally I feel that society needs some sort of authority and justice; parental figures and the law. However, these concepts, when personified, are often prone to would-be corruption; misuse of the authority given to them for the sole purpose of maintaining a constructive society. So the underlining problem: Human Nature

I feel that it's not simply the leader-follower concept that is bad; but rather the stubborness of the leader to give way to the follower. Teenagers become adults; insignificance to authority. And the selfishness of humans; suppress the "insignificance", do not let it become "authority". In other words, those in power try to suppress the helpless such that they retain power while the helpless remain helpless. The result: Poverty and Dynasty. Why is it that I feel it's the process that makes a difference and not the entire concept? Well history obviously shows that no matter how hard we try, human society is going to remain biased. There will always be those who are outcasted and those who are selfish. Animal Farm, Bayonet Training, evidence is found in many such pieces of literature.

But on to my main point, addressing similar concepts to that of the "process" of the system. Is demonstrating your authority good or bad? If I were to embarass someone in front of the public, would it benefit my society or not? I feel that it won't. Firstly, people just don't take demonstrations of authority seriously. We accept that we're forced to abide by your laws, but we're not scared of you. Secondly, it just shows your weakness as a leader, and proves that you are incapable of handling your authority. A good leader does not need to teach his followers, but rather leads by example. As Animal Farm progresses, we notice that we see less and less of Napoleon. The one in power creates an exclusive right for himself; and well obviously it just doesn't work. This means you can't lead by example, you only appear to address the public. Sure, claims of your values and character are voiced, by none other than your subordinates, those who are not suppressed. Coincidence? I think not. Public caning does not help.