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.
The apothegm "Youths are the Leaders of tomorrow" has long existed with the coinages believed to have come from human's intuitive sense of being aware that all power and influences are only ephemeral -no matter how hard one strife to remain in such puissant position. Ranging from elections, coup, resolutions, impeachment and even the inevitable -death-; a leader will definitely concede his or her power through any of the circumstances mentioned amongst various others. As such, the introductory maxim of this write-up is a verisimilitude. Consequently, there is always an undoubted need to prepare the youths of today for the leadership position they are bound to take in the nearest future. The prompt affirms that the best way to groom the youths for leadership in any sphere of the society is through a sense of cooperation and not competition. In my opinion, I strongly agree with the prompts for two reasons.
To begin with, the tenet of sustainability in any action is contingent on total inclusion. In other words, the aphorism "leaving no one behind" is a requisite in attaining a sustainable leadership -one which meets the needs of the present without compromising that of the future. A typical example is the establishment of the United Nations Global Goals for Sustainable Development also known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015. The SDGs are a set of seventeen (17) goals that cut across ending poverty, promoting equality, fighting climate change and promoting social inclusion with a universal aim of achieving a world where everyone lives in peace and shared prosperity through partnerships. Profoundly, the SDGs were constructed by the Open Working Group -appointed by world leaders- at a conference in Rio de janerio, Brazil with a template on the loopholes identified from the recently concluded Millennium Development Goals (a set of eight goals that span through the years 2000 to 2015 in creating a better world). Some of the loopholes identified in the MDGs which resulted in a less than 50% achieved targets were a complete lack of inclusion. The MDGs only targted third world countries (African and Asian countries specifically), this segregation made the world powers to act perfunctorily towards the goals leaving African and Asian leaders with the needed autonomy to extol funds directed for the achievement of the MDGs. The OWG discovered this great barrier and emphasised that to achieve the SDGs, the goals must target everyone irrespective of position, power, gender and race. Thenceforth, the SDGs has brought an unprecendent cooperative among allys and enemies to achieve a common goal through a total inclusive model thta all countries stand to gain for. This example illustrates that to truly achieve a sustainable leadership, solidarity is the way forward, if we are to learn from history.
In furtherance, competition has been a major driver of conflicts in the history of the world. From World War 1, World War 2, Cold War, Trade War and many more. There is a fairly more profound insight; the pine of world leaders to be identified as the top power. World War 2 was reported to be a major feud between the Soviet Union and the United States with many nations taking the side of any of the two countries. Looking at the devastating effect of the World War 2 from Nuclear damages in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to millions of lives being lost, it would be a total negligent to trump competition over cooperation in a society that want to survive. In fact, the World War made world leaders considered the league of nations ineffective which led to the establishment of the United Nations to foster more cooperation. Our past leaders experience with wars must have birthed their clairvoyance in creating a global institution (the UN) that was the most propitious approach to avoiding the scourge of war in the nearest. Evidently, the world as of now has been able to avoid another world war despite more enmity and technological advancements. If competition were the priority, a war would have most likely occured threatening the survival of humanity.
Evidently, history has taught us that a sagacious society is one that priorities inclusion, solidarity and cooperation over competition any time and any moment to keep surviving. It is unarguably the best way as affirmed by the prompt.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-28 | nha1806 | view | |
| 2024-10-31 | ekarumeblessing@icloud.com | 79 | view |
| 2024-08-31 | hainess25 | 70 | view |
| 2024-08-28 | Rishab@1999 | 50 | view |
| 2024-07-02 | MMoksha | 66 | view |
- A person who knowingly commits a crime has broken the social contract and should not retain any civil rights or the right to benefit from his or her own labor 83
- Paleo diets in which one eats how early hominids human ancestors did are becoming increasingly popular Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food especially bone broth a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours They believe 69
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and s 83
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this period most of the complaints re 63
- The first step to self knowledge is rejection of the familiar Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting your po 96
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1045, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...000 to 2015 in creating a better world. Some of the loopholes identified in the MDGs which ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 388, Rule ID: OF_ANY_OF[1]
Message: Consider simply using 'of' instead.
Suggestion: of
...tates with many nations taking the side of any of the two countries. Looking at the devas...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 71, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'priorities'' or 'priority's'?
Suggestion: priorities'; priority's
...us that a sagacious society is one that priorities inclusion, solidarity and cooperation o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, hence, if, look, so, then, third, in fact, in my opinion, in other words, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 110.0 58.6224719101 188% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3649.0 2235.4752809 163% => OK
No of words: 714.0 442.535393258 161% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1106442577 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.16921448885 4.55969084622 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00025270482 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 364.0 215.323595506 169% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509803921569 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 1131.3 704.065955056 161% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 17.0 4.99550561798 340% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 86.629430819 60.3974514979 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.346153846 118.986275619 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4615384615 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.11538461538 5.21951772744 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12784437037 0.243740707755 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429040252607 0.0831039109588 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.063297103205 0.0758088955206 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0960849617957 0.150359130593 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0542925349283 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.02 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 183.0 100.480337079 182% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.