Some people believe that government officials must carry out the will of the people they serve. Others believe that officials should base their decisions on their own judgment.

Whether government officials should carry out the will of the people they serve or base their decisions on their own judgment is a complex question. Both sides have some legitimate grounds but cannot be applied under certain circumstances.

The claim that the government’s decision should reflect the will of the people sounds justified. The government is elected by the people and it is their primary job to serve them, as required by the basic principle of a democratic society. When government officials become too arrogant or too blinded to listen to the voice of the people, their nation may fall into chaos. One example for this is the riot in France, 1968, when the country was at its most prosperous economic growth created by the same glorious leader Charles De Gaulle, the national hero who beat Nazi Germany. The 60s was a radical time in history with new ideology and new culture emerging and clashing with the old ones. The same was happening in France, when students were constantly demanding autonomy of universities, workers higher salary, women equal opportunities and media workers the freedom of speech. However, De Gaulle was too confident about his country, then the strongest in Europe, to pay enough attention to the calling of his people or to realize that it was already a different world out there. Eventually, nation-wide demonstrations took place in May, one that, with the intervention of the police force, became violent and put the entire country to a halt.

Recognizing the importance for government leaders to follow the will of its people, however, it is necessary to point out that people’s voices can sometimes be twisted. For instance, in a world increasingly surrounded by social media, people’s opinions are strongly influenced, or even controlled by the Internet, which is sometimes flooded with faulty facts, hate speech, or worse, lies and deceptions. Recently, a humanitarian group in Syria called The White Helmets has caught great media attention. They were first depicted as the heroes in a war-stricken world, angels to countless children who, without their rescue, would die in the battlefield. Just when people were weeping over their heartrending stories, some journalists reported that they were in fact controlled by anti-Syrian forces and their pictures were a scam, where the same girl was “saved” three times from different places. Of course, rage all over the Internet followed. Which one is real? The simple answer is, we don’t know; but we do know, from this example, that people’s opinions are so easily influenced and often shift so quickly.

Moreover, can ordinary people who know little about politics really contribute to decision-making of an entire country? Take the UK referendum as an example. Almost all experts in the fields of international politics and economics insisted, or even supplicated Britain to vote remain for their own sake, yet the result turned out differently. In this case, the government steadfastly followed its people’s will; only time would tell whether it will turn out to be a good one.

For these reasons, sometimes it is better when government officials stand up to what they believe, as they are trained politicians, which much more information than the general public.

Therefore, there is no sure answer to the question proposed. The optimal solution is that the government should provide the public with abundant information if they are to participate in a national issue, the public should have an effective way of letting their voices heard by the government, and the government should have measures to see through the real intentions of the public while maintaining some basic principles for the sake of national welfare.