Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2




In every society or any villages people have that tendency to support of follow a leader of
group of leaders for they have faith that these leaders can lead them to a certain kind of success
and goal towards the welfare of their life. Yes, people do tend to make it a point to either choose
or blindly follow man/men to become their leader/s. But, before men can follow a leader a
government is to be formed in this sense. Thus, there are different kinds of government in the
philosophy of Russell. Each of it has its own advantages and disadvantages.
I love video games or any open world games. But most especially I love those games that
integrate certain facts about history and the medieval times or the olden times. One popular
example: Assassin’s Creed. This game is a story about a group of assassins trying to retrieve the
apple of Eden but along the way they face certain hindrances and one of them is the power of the
king. The game has clearly an apparent similarity into that of Russell’s idea of absolute monarchy.
Monarchy as we know it is a form of government with a king, monarch, or one man takes a sit on
a throne and be called the ruler. Certain examples of monarchial states are Great Britain, the U.K.,
and maybe even Scotland still practices it. The advantages of a monarchial rule is that a ruler is to
be followed in a way without any questions from the subjects he rules and the people he governs.
He tends to make his military force stronger (like that of Alexander the Great and the rise of the
Roman Empire) and the security levels of a kingdom is more secure. A monarch can also
implement laws and rules the quickest way possible for he has absolute power. These are its
advantages. Yet in a monarchial rule there are also certain disadvantages. Tyrion Lannister in the
legendary series Game of Thrones said in one of his lines from the series: “sons of kings can be
cruel and stupid as you well know.” Yes, one of the disadvantages of having a monarchial rule is
the inevitability of an heir to ascend to the throne. But what if the sons of kings can really change
the course that their father, a king, has started? Bad leadership can take an excelling nation and
cripple it. Another disadvantage is that in absolute monarchy, the governed have fewer privileges
and can cause a societal rebellion and military might can be used against the people. Thus, fear
prevails rather than the willing support of the people.
The natural successor to absolute monarchy is oligarchy. Oligarchy is a form of
government where a certain group or place is governed by a group of men. Be it be the rich,
aristocrats, the Church, or a political party. Like monarchy, there are also advantages and
disadvantages of the Oligarch. Its advantage is that in the Oligarchy there is a certain group of
leaders that can arrive at a more meaningful decision because they have been in a group and think
as a whole to offer the best possible service for the betterment of their subjects. But in its
disadvantage, there is a hole in this kind of government because if it was the case then there would
be divisions. There would be a division among the leaders, the subjects and maybe even the church.
Different opinions will come from other groups and can cause chaos. The higher bourgeoise may
take advantage of the weaker ones because there is only one common goal of all these groups: the
ascendancy to power. All for selfish ambitions.
What form of government then unites the people against monarchial and oligarchical rule?
It is democracy. Abraham Lincoln is one of the most notable rulers in the world. His ideas have
been the birth of democracy in the States and it frees every man from turmoil in the land because
of slavery. Democracy is a kind of government where the public or the people share the power of
the ruler. In his lines, Noynoy Aquino keeps saying “Kayo ang Boss ko.” And that statement is a
bold statement for he is admitting that our country is a democratic one. In a democracy a ruler
must respect the public opinion. The people are more powerful than the ruler but at some point,
there may also be certain dilemmas faced by the ruler if there may be opposing ideas of the public.
He might not be able to choose one of them but the good part of it is that he has to choose what’s
best for the people. In a democratic state there must also be the propensity to act quickly on things
and there should also be the propensity to think carefully on things.
Some men are desperate for power but most men are even more desperate for leadership.
Men thirst for power but they know that they thirst more for a ruler that can finally lead them to a
situation where they can all benefit. Surely, monarchy and oligarchy have done their parts but they
may not really be ideal for some. These two have great disadvantages and encourages a ruler to
practice such power for the benefit of himself. The bridge that makes up for these disadvantages
is the forming of a democratic government. In democracy there is a fair share between the ruler
and the people. Though there may be some disadvantages in a democratic government its ways
and ideologies make up for the betterment of one society. But the real goal, one must know, in
every forms of government whether it be Tsarist, Dictatorship, Monarchy, Oligarchy, Presidential
and other kinds of government, must not be the greediness and thinking only of the ascendancy to
power; it has to be for the improvement of one society and securing the welfare of the people.