<p>I’m curious to see what my essay would score on CC as opposed to the actual college board readers…</p>
<p>*Should leaders of a country or group be judged by different standards? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations. </p>
<p>The pages of history are splattered with the blood of innocents. As the famous adage goes: “Absolute power corrupts absolutely,” and time and time again history has proven this statement true. Leaders are not above the laws they themselves have created for the simple fact that they are human as well and are constantly susceptible to human fallacies such as greed, emotion, and lust.</p>
<p>As John Locke once said, “It is the duty of government to provide and defend inalienable rights to its people.” Government’s function is the protection of its people, and by allowing certain individuals supreme mandate in dictating policy and legislation the rights inherent to man are violated. Equality is essential in a nation; from the President to the common worker each person is due certain rights. No leaders is above the law, at their base level they are still human.</p>
<p>It is also imperative to consider the factor of human nature and emotion when contemplating the issue. As humanity, each person has flaws in their judgment and biased views. As flawed people, how can one person be considered so much greater than a common man that he be judged on a different scale? In Fyodor Dostoevksy’s “Crime and Punishment”, he examines the question of whether or not man can overcome his natural human weakness and become a metaphorical “superman”? In essence, Dostoevsky is arguing the feasibility of judging man on different scales according to their nature and ability. At the climax of the novel, Dostoevsky concludes that man will always feel remorse for his sins and cannot become greater than human nature, thereby declaring that no man is above the law. Analyzing his writing, one can conclude that human rationality is weaker than the human conscience, so man will always stay flawed and equal. Judging certain individuals on a separate scale is not logical when taking into consideration the human factor.</p>
<p>Great leaders of history have left their mark, whether it be for good or evil. A man who had a great impact on the world and yet remained a globally reviled man was Hitler, leader of Germany during World War II. As a leader, he lead Germany’s armies to great victory across continents and was a military strategist on the level of Napoleon himself. Yet, as a human, you cannot judge Hitler differently than any other man when considering the atrocity of his war crimes. The slaughter of millions and his inclination towards genocide is inherently wrong and horrifying. His ability as a leader does not excuse his other sins.</p>
<p>To answer the question of whether or not one should judge a person based on status, one must contemplate the factors of human nature, the rights of the people and the equality in humanity, and the conflict between ability and morals. It is not logical to judge a man based on his status since he too is a man, and as such is privy to the same flaws that all other members of the human race share.</p>
<p>Take your best guess.</p>