Despotic Leadership

Ethical Leadership to benevolence

The creation, recognition, and affirmation of a leader itself is not reliant of a singular independent view of an individual of his or her capabilities of being a leader. The people, the community, contribute to a position and power of leader as it attributes to a social contract.

On the basis of the misunderstanding of society, democracy is that it purposes the plea or need of the people for their interest to be heard, and evidently serves as a tool used to look for the beneficial leader of the Philippines.

Contrary to the traditional definition of democracy that notes reaching peace is a state where equality is present in the society. That democracy is a national tool rather a personal one, acting as a

A good example would be the notion of democracy as discussed prior. Initially democracy was of peace coming from equality, analogous to good coming from good. Democracy was always viewed in opposition to other forms of government that was unequal in the rights of the people. As society evolves democracy is subject to new meaning and reconsiderations that becomes more abusive and unequal than it precedent definition notes.

Despotic leadership by definition is one opposed to benevolence. A Despotic leadership is one that means a “tyrannic ruler”. Under this certain leadership there is less right to the people and the authority relies of force in law to bring order with a certain level of intimidation by the leading authority to the body it governs. (Vocabulary.com) As such it is not as well attributed to Democracy as that of the ethical leadership.

Despotism is negatively viewed but according to De Hoogh and Deh Hartog that dependents of leading authorities that were notes to be despotic were not that less effective or less optimistic than other managements. The attraction to despotic leadership is that it proposes a solution the current chaos that is brought by the non-proper or insufficient regulation of the safeguards of

Quoting a scholars reaction, “I can 't believe that the Philippines has become a case study on how saying and doing all the wrong things will make you president. What a time to be alive.” (Facebook, Andran Sanchez). Many view the election outcome as a warning to move out of the country in fear of tyrannical ruler.

The turmoil and conflict of the Philippines with the dissatisfaction of the people with its leader or leaders is attributed to the feeling of being threatened. Man looks to the most effective way for chaos to be deterred even in opposition and conflict with others, as long as they themselves receive a certain level of assurance for their survival even considering non-benign options.

The results of the election polls and the attitude of the people to general occurrence and the to each candidates reflect their own act towards self-perseverance. In the presence of the possible leadership that is not according to their own preference of self-perseverance, there comes the question whether the leading candidate offering a certain despotic rule will being benevolent