Politics Archives

A good leader must be a good follower. Is this necessarily true?

A good leader often benefits from being a good follower, gaining essential skills and insights. However, leadership also requires independent thinking and decisive action, which do not always align with the premise of the question.

I. Introduction

Hook: Leadership and followership are often seen as opposing roles.
Background: Brief overview of leadership qualities and the importance of followership.
Thesis Statement: A good leader often benefits from being a good follower, gaining essential skills and insights. However, leadership also requires independent thinking and decisive action, which do not always align with following.

II. Supporting View 1: Understanding Team Dynamics

Topic Sentence: Good followers understand team dynamics, which is crucial for effective leadership.
Example 1: In 2020, Jacinda Ardern’s collaborative approach in New Zealand showed strong team dynamics.
Example 2: In 2018, Emmanuel Macron’s rise involved understanding and working within different political groups in France.
Example 3: In 2021, Sanna Marin’s leadership in Finland highlighted her ability to engage with her team.
Analysis: These examples show that understanding team dynamics enhances leadership effectiveness.

III. Supporting View 2: Empathy and Support

Topic Sentence: Good followers develop empathy and the ability to support others, crucial for leaders.
Example 1: In 2017, Angela Merkel’s empathetic response to the refugee crisis showed her understanding of people’s needs in Germany.
Example 2: In 2019, Justin Trudeau’s supportive policies in Canada demonstrated empathy.
Example 3: In 2018, Leo Varadkar’s leadership in Ireland reflected his supportive approach to social issues.
Analysis: These cases illustrate how empathy and support are vital leadership qualities developed through good followership.

IV. Supporting View 3: Learning from Leaders

Topic Sentence: Good followers learn from their leaders, which is essential for their own leadership development.
Example 1: In 2018, Theresa May’s experience under David Cameron in the UK shaped her leadership.
Example 2: In 2019, Japan’s Shinzo Abe benefited from his early political roles.
Example 3: In 2020, Pedro Sánchez of Spain grew through his political experiences.
Analysis: These examples highlight how learning from leaders can prepare individuals for their own leadership roles.

V. Opposing View 1: Independent Thinking

Topic Sentence: Leadership requires independent thinking, which does not always align with being a follower.
Example 1: In 2019, Narendra Modi’s decisive actions in India showed independent leadership.
Example 2: In 2018, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman demonstrated independent, sometimes controversial, decisions.
Example 3: In 2020, Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky showed strong independent leadership in crisis.
Analysis: These cases demonstrate how independent thinking is crucial for effective leadership.

VI. Opposing View 2: Decisiveness and Authority

Topic Sentence: Leaders need to make decisive and authoritative decisions, which followers may not always do.
Example 1: In 2021, Boris Johnson’s handling of the UK’s COVID-19 response required decisive leadership.
Example 2: In 2020, South Korea’s Moon Jae-in took decisive actions against COVID-19.
Example 3: In 2019, Ethiopia’s Abiy Ahmed’s peace efforts required authoritative decisions.
Analysis: These instances show that decisiveness and authority are essential for leadership, sometimes contrasting with followership.

VII. Opposing View 3: Vision and Innovation

Topic Sentence: Effective leaders often have a vision and drive innovation, which followers may lack.
Example 1: In 2020, Taiwan’s Tsai Ing-wen showed innovative leadership in technology and health.
Example 2: In 2018, Rwanda’s Paul Kagame led with a vision for technological advancement.
Analysis: These examples illustrate that having a vision and driving innovation are key leadership traits.

VIII. Conclusion

Restate Thesis: While being a good follower can enhance leadership skills, effective leadership also requires independent thinking, decisiveness, and vision.
Summary of Key Points: Recap the main supporting and opposing views.
Final Thought: A balanced approach that integrates followership experiences with independent leadership traits is ideal.

This essay is overly focused on politicians and may not score well, although it has many examples. It is important to provide a broad perspective of where leaders are needed. Leaders can be found in schools, the military, prisons, and any place where hierarchies are required, i.e., even at home.

Is the cost of developing a national identity too high?

The cost of developing a national identity can be high due to potential social and economic conflicts. However, it is essential for unity and cultural preservation.

I. Introduction

Hook: National identity shapes a nation’s character and values.
Background: Overview of the importance and costs of developing national identity.
Thesis Statement: The cost of developing a national identity can be high due to potential social and economic conflicts. However, it is essential for unity and cultural preservation.

II. Supporting View 1: Social Conflict

Topic Sentence: Developing a national identity can lead to social conflict.
Example 1: In 2017, Catalonia’s push for independence caused severe tension in Spain.
Example 2: In 2014, Scotland’s independence referendum divided the UK.
Example 3: In 2019, the Hong Kong protests highlighted identity struggles within China.
Analysis: These examples show how efforts to develop national identity can cause social unrest and division.

III. Supporting View 2: Economic Costs

Topic Sentence: Developing a national identity can incur significant economic costs.
Example 1: In 2016, Brexit led to economic uncertainty in the UK.
Example 2: In 2018, Italy’s nationalist policies strained its economy and EU relations.
Example 3: In 2020, India’s national identity campaigns, like “Make in India,” faced economic challenges.
Analysis: These instances demonstrate how national identity efforts can lead to substantial economic costs.

IV. Opposing View 1: Unity and Social Cohesion

Topic Sentence: National identity fosters unity and social cohesion.
Example 1: In 2021, Japan’s Olympics fostered national pride and unity.
Example 2: In 2018, France’s World Cup victory boosted national morale.
Example 3: In 2017, Finland’s centenary celebrations reinforced national unity.
Analysis: These examples illustrate how a strong national identity can bring people together and foster a sense of belonging.

V. Opposing View 2: Cultural Preservation

Topic Sentence: Developing a national identity helps preserve cultural heritage.
Example 1: In 2021, South Korea promoted its cultural heritage through K-pop and K-dramas.
Example 2: In 2016, India celebrated its cultural diversity through various national initiatives.
Example 3: In 2020, Ireland’s cultural festivals reinforced its unique identity.
Analysis: These instances highlight how national identity efforts help preserve and promote cultural heritage.

VI. Conclusion

Restate Thesis: While developing a national identity can be costly due to social and economic conflicts, it is essential for unity and cultural preservation.
Summary of Key Points: Recap the main supporting and opposing views.
Final Thought: Balance efforts to foster national identity with strategies to mitigate social and economic costs.

Examine the claim that patriotism is of little value in modern times.

While some argue that patriotism has diminished in value due to globalisation and modern challenges, others believe it remains essential for national unity and identity.

I. Introduction

Hook: Patriotism is often debated in today’s globalised world.
Background: Overview of patriotism’s role historically and in contemporary society.
Thesis Statement: While some argue that patriotism has diminished in value due to globalisation and modern challenges, others believe it remains essential for national unity and identity.

II. Supporting View 1: Globalisation Reduces Patriotism

Topic Sentence: Globalisation diminishes the value of patriotism.
Example 1: In 2016, the Brexit debate highlighted how globalisation challenges national loyalty in the UK.
Example 2: In 2020, protests in Hong Kong emphasised a struggle between local identity and global influences.
Example 3: In 2018, the Catalonia independence movement showed the conflict between regionalism and national loyalty in Spain.
Analysis: These examples show how globalisation and regional identities challenge traditional patriotism.

III. Supporting View 2: Modern Challenges Outweigh Patriotism

Topic Sentence: Modern challenges make patriotism seem less relevant.
Example 1: In 2021, climate change protests in Germany prioritised global environmental issues over national pride.
Example 2: In 2019, the refugee crisis in Europe raised questions about national borders versus humanitarian concerns.
Example 3: In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic required global cooperation, reducing focus on national interests.
Analysis: These instances illustrate how pressing global issues can overshadow patriotic sentiments.

IV. Opposing View 1: Patriotism Promotes National Unity

Topic Sentence: Patriotism fosters national unity and social cohesion.
Example 1: In 2021, the UK’s response to COVID-19 saw a surge in national unity and support for the NHS.
Example 2: In 2018, the French rallied together during the World Cup, boosting national pride and unity.
Example 3: In 2020, Japan’s Olympics preparations highlighted patriotism and collective effort.
Analysis: These examples show how patriotism can bring people together, fostering unity and pride.

V. Opposing View 2: Patriotism Maintains National Identity

Topic Sentence: Patriotism helps maintain and celebrate national identity.
Example 1: In 2017, India’s celebration of Independence Day highlighted its cultural heritage and unity.
Example 2: In 2020, Russia’s Victory Day parade reinforced national pride and historical remembrance.
Example 3: In 2019, Australia Day celebrated national achievements and identity despite controversies.
Analysis: These instances demonstrate how patriotism sustains national identity and cultural values.

VI. Conclusion

Restate Thesis: While globalisation and modern challenges may reduce patriotism’s perceived value, it remains crucial for national unity and identity.
Summary of Key Points: Recap the main supporting and opposing views.
Final Thought: Balance global cooperation with national pride to navigate modern complexities.

Giving people a voice only makes matters worse. What are your views?

While giving people a voice can lead to conflict and misinformation, it also promotes democracy, accountability, and social change, suggesting a complex impact.

I. Introduction

Hook: Free speech is both celebrated and criticised.
Background: Overview of the benefits and drawbacks of giving people a voice.
Thesis Statement: While giving people a voice can lead to conflict and misinformation, it also promotes democracy, accountability, and social change, suggesting a complex impact.

II. Supporting View 1: Conflict and Division

Topic Sentence: Giving people a voice can lead to conflict and division.
Example 1: In 2016, Brexit debates divided the UK deeply.
Example 2: In 2021, protests in Myanmar led to violent clashes after the military coup.
Example 3: In 2019, Hong Kong protests caused severe social and political tensions.
Analysis: These examples show that free expression can escalate conflicts and divisions.

III. Supporting View 2: Spread of Misinformation

Topic Sentence: Free speech can result in the spread of misinformation.
Example 1: In 2016, false news about the EU influenced the Brexit referendum in the UK.
Example 2: In 2020, false information on COVID-19 spread widely in India, causing panic.
Example 3: In 2018, fake news on social media led to lynchings in Indonesia.
Analysis: These cases demonstrate how misinformation can worsen situations when people have unchecked freedom of speech.

IV. Opposing View 1: Promotes Democracy

Topic Sentence: Giving people a voice promotes democracy and accountability.
Example 1: In 2011, the Arab Spring saw citizens demand democratic reforms across the Middle East.
Example 2: In 1994, South Africa’s end of apartheid was influenced by voices demanding equality.
Example 3: In 2020, Belarus protests called for fair elections and democracy.
Analysis: These examples highlight how free speech can drive democratic change and accountability.

V. Opposing View 2: Enables Social Change

Topic Sentence: Free speech enables significant social change.
Example 1: In 2015, Tunisia’s peaceful protests led to a democratic constitution.
Example 2: In 2006, the Chilean student protests achieved education reform.
Example 3: In 2017, the #MeToo movement spread globally, challenging sexual harassment.
Analysis: These instances show that giving people a voice can lead to important social changes.

VI. Conclusion

Restate Thesis: While giving people a voice can lead to conflict and misinformation, it also promotes democracy and social change, indicating a complex impact.
Summary of Key Points: Recap the main supporting and opposing views.
Final Thought: Balance the benefits and risks of free speech to harness its positive impact.

Now, more than ever, people need to be aware of their rights. Discuss.

I. Introduction

Hook: In an era marked by globalization, technological advancement, and social change, understanding one’s rights has never been more important.
Background: Overview of the evolving nature of rights and the contemporary challenges that necessitate greater awareness.
Thesis Statement: In today’s complex and rapidly changing world, it is crucial for individuals to be aware of their rights to safeguard their freedoms, ensure social justice, and effectively participate in democratic processes, despite arguments that suggest such awareness can lead to increased societal conflicts and misuse of rights.

II. Supporting View 1: Safeguarding Freedoms

Topic Sentence: Awareness of rights is essential for safeguarding personal freedoms and preventing abuses of power.
Example 1: The role of whistleblowers like Edward Snowden, who exposed government surveillance programs, highlighting the importance of privacy rights.
Example 2: The global #MeToo movement, which empowered individuals to speak out against sexual harassment and abuse, emphasizing the need for awareness of legal protections.
Analysis: Discuss how these examples show the importance of rights awareness in protecting individual freedoms and fostering a culture of accountability.

III. Supporting View 2: Ensuring Social Justice

Topic Sentence: Being aware of one’s rights is crucial for promoting social justice and addressing systemic inequalities.
Example 1: The Black Lives Matter movement, which has raised awareness of police brutality and systemic racism, leading to significant social and legislative changes.
Example 2: The advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights, which has led to the legalization of same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination laws in many countries.
Analysis: Examine how these movements demonstrate the power of rights awareness in driving social justice and achieving legal reforms.

IV. Opposing View 1: Increased Societal Conflicts

Topic Sentence: Some argue that heightened awareness of rights can lead to increased societal conflicts and polarization.
Example 1: The rise in protests and civil unrest, such as those seen during the 2020 U.S. presidential election, where differing views on rights led to significant societal tension.
Example 2: The backlash against public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, where individuals citing personal freedoms clashed with government-imposed restrictions.
Analysis: Discuss how these situations suggest that increased rights awareness can sometimes lead to conflicts and challenges in maintaining social order.

V. Opposing View 2: Misuse of Rights

Topic Sentence: Awareness of rights can sometimes lead to their misuse, undermining the intended protections.
Example 1: The exploitation of free speech rights to spread misinformation and hate speech online, which can harm public discourse and societal harmony.
Example 2: Legal loopholes used by corporations to avoid accountability and evade regulations, demonstrating how rights can be manipulated for unjust advantages.
Analysis: Explore how these examples highlight the potential negative consequences of rights awareness when it leads to exploitation and misuse.

VI. Conclusion

Restate Thesis: While increased awareness of rights is essential for protecting freedoms and promoting social justice, it can also lead to societal conflicts and misuse of rights if not properly managed.
Summary of Key Points: Recap the main supporting and opposing views discussed.
Final Thought: Emphasize the need for balanced education on rights that includes both the benefits and responsibilities, fostering a more informed and cohesive society.

Only educated people should have the right to vote in elections. What is your view?

The US Presidential election in 2016 shocked everyone. This was because a billionaire businessman who never held political office had been elected to the most powerful position in the world. Furthermore, his win stemmed from ethnic antagonism, strict immigration controls, sexism and hate mongering. Such results lead to the question: should only educated people have the right to vote? There are people who agree that only educated people should vote as they can make rational decisions. On the other hand, there are those who believe that voting should be accessible to all as everyone has their own set of beliefs. Agreeing with the latter view, it can be contended that everyone should have the right to vote regardless of education because equality in political decisions is necessary and helps us in identifying issues that are prevalent in the society.

Voting rights should not be limited to educated people as everyone’s vote counts. Voting has been an important democratic right. In a democracy every single vote is important because it represents the people. Voting right if given only an educated group means that we are ignoring the voices and opinions of thousands who are uneducated. In developed modern democracies people have the right to vote equally because votes are the collective beliefs and opinions of the populace. In countries like the United Kingdom and Singapore, voting rights have been endowed upon all of voting age. Thus, it is important that everyone is given equal rights to vote regardless of education because that is the true essence of democracy.

Those who argue that educated people should be the only ones to vote believe that they are politically literate. However, there is no truth in this argument. Though education is an important tool in giving us wider perspectives on various social subjects. However, just because a person is educated does not mean that he is politically knowledgeable. Even educated people find the subject of politics complicated and lack knowledge on political matters. On the contrary uneducated people are more likely to understand political matters than the educated people. This can be seen in countries like India where uneducated voters play an important role in the elections. The second issue lies with the ambiguousness of the term educated. Would a person from high school be considered educated enough to vote? In schools or colleges no one studies in-depth politics, thus it should not be a factor in allowing someone to vote. Therefore, education does not translate into political knowledge or awareness which means that everyone should have the right to vote in elections.

A true democracy allows all people to vote and brings forth the issues of social importance. Giving voting rights to only one group is a form of inequality. Voting rights given to all regardless of educational qualifications allows representation of all people and not just a selection of people. For example, despite controversial views of Trump on immigration and trade, Americans chose him because he spoke of issues that affected people from lower socio-economic backgrounds. His statements of restoring America to greatness struck a chord with many Americans that eventually led to him winning the elections. However, there are many opposed and still oppose the Trump administration. Democracy is the power due to which various political and social issues can come to the front. If only educated people are allowed to vote only issues affecting them will get highlighted and the uneducated will be completely disenfranchised. This can lead to conflict and tensions within the society and can also lead to prejudice and violence. Thus, it is important that everyone is allowed to vote regardless of educational background.

In conclusion, allowing only one group – the educated people – to vote than the uneducated people is discriminatory and should not be allowed. Favouring the educated over the uneducated goes against the basic tenets of democracy which asks for equality to be practiced. Voting should be allowed for all because it helps highlight the issues of all the groups involved and not just the elite. In a nutshell, allowing everyone to vote is a step in the right direction towards equality.

Why is it that world peace remains unattainable?

World peace remains unattainable because lies, cover-ups, deceit and corruption stand in the way. International peace remains unattainable because international organisations are weak and do not have strong leaders. While naysayers will highlight the fight against terrorism, and deposing authoritarian leaders as successes, these same myopic sheep forget about the 30 civil war conflicts that plague the world. They forget about the

Champions of peace suggest that the fall in the number of terrorist activities is attributed to international cooperation among various nations. The defeat of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is cited as a victory. But the reality is that organisations such as ISIS have mutated into different organisations. Where ISIS was previously only focused on Iraq and Syria, it has branched into Sudan, Nigeria and even parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh. Taking back Iraqi and Syrian towns and cities from ISIS was a major achievement, but the “physical” destruction involved did not cripple ISIS. It instead involved the destruction of the homes and businesses of ordinary people. If anything, the Iraqi government’s poor performance in restoring those homes and business has created a serious new cause of instability that aids the potential recovery of ISIS – as does the creation of new refugee and displaced populations in Syria. Crises still linger in Yemen, Myanmar, Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Ethiopia and the Southern Philippines where in-fighting continues between different factions.

In the immediate aftermath of World War II, the creation of the U.N. and the European project were the most imaginative attempts to banish war without trying for the utopia—or perhaps dystopia—of world government: They aimed at reconciling the welcome diversity of states with the need for a robust transnational system of laws that regulates their relations. Today, both are in crisis: The U.N. has proven incapable of reforming its security council, and the European project, whose example and appeal helped stabilise western Europe, is unable to transform its environment and deal effectively with issues including a Middle East in turmoil and a nationalist Russia. Today there are around 100,000 personnel from over 100 countries serving in 18 UN peace operations around the world, at an annual cost of five billion dollars.

With aggressive posturing in South China Sea by China, clashes between India and China on their mountainous borders, is it any wonder that peace is illusive? Russia’s dominance in the artic, as well as it political meddling in Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia, has created tensions in another political theatre. With the remaining members of the U.N. security council monkeying around to flex their own political whims, the chaos that needs to be quelled is engineered and instigated by the same countries that are tasked to protect the rest of the world. For international peace to be attained, archaic systems must change. Is it any wonder that world peace is unattainable?

Historical figures that have caused the most harm are the most influential. How far do you agree?

The undeniable truth is that the most influential individuals in history are those who have done the most good, and not the most harm. Historical figures like Mandela, Che Guevera and Einstein have imparted ideas and values that still continue to inspire people. Their influence cannot be measured against vile and vicious leaders.

Historical figures are those people who have left a significant mark on people and have influenced society or the world in one way or another. Many historical figures are remembered because of their heroic deeds and their name is taken with love and respect. While others are known for their atrocities and tyranny and sheer thought of these people brings feelings of disgust and anger. It would be myopic to say that historical figures that have caused the most harm are most influential. Those that have worked tirelessly to make a difference in this world are far more many than the few that have caused the most harm.

People who are of the view that we remember historical figures of the harm they cause, may often cite examples of Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. These people plundered and caused destruction of life and land. So cruel were their actions that millions of people faced atrocities like genocide, ethnic cleansing, slavery, and arbitrary homicide. Their actions are still remembered by many people today and their name is spoken with utter disdain but it would be difficult to accept that they left a lasting influence of their ethos and pathos.

However, there are people in history who have done great deeds and have left a legacy. Though people may feel sad and grieve about people who have lost lives during the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein or Muamar Ghaddhafi, people cannot forget the historical heroes who worked for the greater good of the society and left a legacy for people which is still followed. The teachings of Mahatma Gandhi of truth and non-violence resonate with people even today. Similarly, the teachings of The Dalai Lama about patience, tolerance and forgiveness has immense influence on people. Thus, it can be said that historical figures that have done good leave a better and lasting influence on people than historical figures who have harmed the humanity.

Many historical figures like artists, philosophers and scientists have provided insights into the workings of the world. There are also those who have invented and discovered things that have impacted humans in great ways. For example, writers like Gabriel García Márquez has influenced writers and readers across the world. His influential works like One Hundred Years of Solitude and Love in the Time of Cholera has inspired modern writers like Salman Rushdie to adopt Marquez’s style of writing and has used it in many of his novels. Words of William Shakespeare too hold significant power today. No English literature class is complete without studying his works. Art of Frida Kahlo, portrayed the struggle for self-determination in the lives of women still connects with many women and men today. Thus, people who have influenced society in a positive way by portraying their society in real form and trying to bring change have had a greater influence than people who have harmed the humanity.

There are those who argue that those who have caused the most harm leave a lasting influence. It is true in some sense because it helps people in avoiding the mistakes the historical figures made. For instance, some may assert that the memory of the Holocaust under Hitler’s reign will prevent humanity from repeating such an atrocity. However, this is not true because evil acts are a part of society if historical atrocities are a reminder that we should not commit these crimes then why do racial prejudice, islamophobia and sentiments like anti-Semitism still exist? People like Hitler have simply been replaced by men like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who once declared his intention to wipe Israel “off the world map”. In fact, majority of the middle east harbours the harshest anti-Semitic sentiments. The media channels in these countries also use provocative Nazi-like language that oppose Israel and the West. Therefore, it can be said that good historical figures leave a lasting impact on people and bring positive change, however, tyrannical historical figures do not leave any guidelines for people or do not inspire others to be less evil.

Why should we be concerned with current affairs when most of them will soon be forgotten?

After all, ignorance is not always bliss. In the words of Dalai Lama, “Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace.”

People spend hours watching news and debates on CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera, in an effort to keep abreast of the current socioeconomic issues. Current news provides us with much needed information about the issues people are facing around the world. The news of today can also help us in understanding the incidents which may happen in the future. Thus, it is important that people follow the current affairs because if we do not pay attention about the decisions which are taken around the world it will have a negative impact on countries, economies and common people.

People who hold the view that people should not be concerned about current affairs often suggest that it is a waste of time. These news pieces are short-lived and may not influence the people on a global level. In a world of technology, we are bombarded with news that is transient and short-lived in nature. However, just because, a current event might not have relevance in the future it does not mean that it is not important today. Being aware of current affairs is necessary because some issues can affect us as well and can also pose a threat. For example, the coronavirus (COVID-19) threat is something one needs to be aware of. That is because only awareness can help in prevention of the disease. If people are not aware of the coronavirus news, then they might risk their lives as well as the lives of others. Current news can help us to take precautionary messages and can save hundreds of lives. An example of this can be the news about Ukrainian Airlines plane being accidentally shot down by Iran which prompted other airlines to avoid airspace near Iran and Iraq. Thus, current affairs news can be a life saviour for many and people should keep themselves updated about current affairs.

Current world news not only makes people aware about threats but also about opportunity. In a globalised world, current affairs can also open up avenues for people to understand current market trends. One example of this is companies profiting from selling masks and hand sanitisers at exorbitant prices because of the ongoing, coronavirus threat. Another example can be of Just Inc., a food and beverage company which makes plant-based egg products which received multiple inquiries and from Chinese food companies seeking animal-free protein sources amid the coronavirus outbreak. The impasse between Russia and Saudi Arabia over the price and production of oil or the ongoing spat between India and Malaysia regarding the palm oil create opportunities for forex and commodity traders as well as businessmen. Thus, by keeping in touch with current news, people can profit and succeed in life.

Though most of the current events would be forgotten in the future, it does not mean all news will meet a similar fate. The events that affect people today can also have a lasting impact on people and the world. For example, Indian mission of Chandrayaan-2 of sending an orbiter, lander, and rover to Moon’s southern hemisphere will be remembered by many in the future. Similarly, Joseph Schooling winning Singapore’s first-ever Olympic gold would always be remembered even by the future generations. People who are sceptical of following current may argue that today’s current news does not have much significance. However, if people do not follow current news then they might remain unaware about significant events that occur around the world.

In conclusion, people should be interested and concerned about current affairs because these news pieces inform, alert and raise awareness among millions of people. If people follow current news, then they can also exploit opportunities to gain profits and make informed choices. One has to be aware about the surroundings around the world. After all, ignorance is not always bliss. In the words of Dalai Lama, “Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace.”

A picture is more powerful than words. Discuss.

Though many might believe that pictures hold a greater power, the claim is not completely justified. This is because words tend to be more influential as it has the power to influence people mentally and emotionally.

Technological advancements in the modern age have allowed people to have access to media more than ever before. Through apps like Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook and Tumblr, people can share and view images which are mundane to the mind-boggling. A picture is more powerful than words.

Critics of words suggest that images have more power than words because they capture the imagination of society in an impactful manner. There is little doubt that images are considered more creative than words and have contributed largely to the society in positive ways. For example, the artist Banksy is known to highlight powerful messages through his art. Similarly, in the earlier times many artists like Goya, Picasso and Jacques Louis David had tried to revolutionize the world through their art. Photographs like A Man on the Moon or Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl are considered important images that has changed the course of history. Photographs have also captured the horrors of war which has led to huge emotional response. Notable photographs include the Napalm Girl, which showed the impact of American war in Vietnam. Thus, it can be said that images have exposed the horrors that exist in the world. As such, a picture is more powerful than words.

Critics of pictures valiantly promote the view that despite the allure of pictures and videos, words still hold a significant place. They explify their stand by citing the ever increasing sales of novels, books and magazines. For example, J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter is still popular; books like 1984 by George Orwell and Killing a Mockingbird by Harper Lee continue to leave a lasting impact on new audiences. Words are a powerful medium is also evident from the fact that, people continue to buy self-help books. For example books like “You can heal your Life” by Louise Hay and “The Alchemist” by Paulo Coelho have sold millions of copies and continue to inspire people and guide them to live a successful and happy life. Words are an elixer that soothes the mind and soul. Hence, pictures are not always more powerful.

However, pictures do not always convey the intended meaning and sometimes the people fail to connect with pictures on an emotional level. Words have a more lasting impact and can stand the test of time. For example, Shakespeare’s plays like Hamlet, The Last Lear and As you Like, use words that evoke a series of emotions that people can still relate to in present times. The mastery of his words continues to inspire and impress people around the world even today. In fact, many phrases used by people in daily life are actually from Shakespeare’s plays. His dialogues like “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players” are repeated and considered a metaphor for life even today.

Images of Mahatma Gandhi exemplify peaceful resistance. The famed head portrait of Che Guevera subliminally depict the fight against oppression. When Malala Yousufzai’s or Greta Thunberg’s stand to deliver the views, it is images that we first connect to, not words. Historically, the mushroom cloud over Hiroshima is still etched in all our minds. In more contemporary times, the incessant media coverage on Trump has painted in our minds a certain view of him. It is pictures that move and mould our thinking. Not words. A picture is more powerful than words.

No single word has changed the world, but a single picture has.