President and Prime Minister.. Good leadership

[KingHashirama]

Debate: President and Prime Minister.. Good leadership

This is not a prime minister vs President thread. It is about Prime minister and President being good leaders or not.


Background of debate topic:


Prime minister: A prime minister is the most senior minister of cabinet in the executive branch of government in a parliamentary system.

President: is the leader of a country or a division or part of a country, typically a republic, a democracy, or a dictatorship

Essentially, both act as the "leaders" of their country dependent on the nation. Modi (indian prime minister) acts as the leader for india, like how Obama (president of the united states) acts as the leader of U.S.


The topic of Debate:

With that said, the debate is about whether the prime minister/ president should act as administrator's or actual leaders that involve themselves with their people, and address everyday issues.

I have not seen that many presidents or prime ministers address internal terrorism such as; gangs, cartel, mafia. But instead focus on external affairs.

The debate of course should take note that the president/prime minister position has involved from just being a admin that looks after the capitol or external affairs, to a position that is held responsible for what happens in the country on a daily basis.


Debate Questions:

Should the president/prime minister be more than just an admin role, and actually participate in internal affairs such as getting rid of gangs and etc?

Should the president/prime minister be just an admin role person, or a moral leader of the country?


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I would like to leave 1 quote from Naruto that i found interesting regarding leadership:

"Those who stray from the path of justice have no courage, but under the wing of a strong leader, cowardice cannot survive."​

 

[Kai NB]

All I'm going to say is no, because giving too much responsibility will lead to giving more power which can result in a tyranny if one entity receives too much. Every task should be equally separated so as to prevent a certain person/group from becoming too strong

 

[The Sach]

Actually he should act as an 'admin', that is he should take care look after ministers under him. Affairs like mafia are taken care by ministers related to security department, who then report to PM. There needs to be a proper hierarchy, but at the same time he/she should pay a visit to actual sight to maintain that man-to-man contact with common people.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Should they handle it themselves? No. But I don't see why they can't establish a presidential organization or branch, and by that I mean a part of the government like congress that consists of a group of people who are in charge of handling domestic/internal affairs such as this that are overseen by the president/prime minister.

This is of course assuming they really give a **** and aren't the crooked politicians.

 

[BlacLord™]

Some countries have both a president and a P.M., i.e. France.

 

[Anorien16]

Powers and limitations of a Post in the Goverment is primarily decided by the respective Country's Constitution and Laws. No matter what people may argue their capabilities will remain though better attitudes can be suggested.

 

[KingHashirama]

Some countries have both a president and a P.M., i.e. France.

prime minister is usually the one with more power in those countries. Or atleast the one that acts as the "poster boy" or the "leader".

Actually he should act as an 'admin', that is he should take care look after ministers under him. Affairs like mafia are taken care by ministers related to security department, who then report to PM. There needs to be a proper hierarchy, but at the same time he/she should pay a visit to actual sight to maintain that man-to-man contact with common people.

People won't take care of mafia and etc, if the president himself (the guy is portrayed as the leader of the country) doesn't go against them.

I for one as a kid, had looked up to the president as the "leader" guy. I think it was lincoln who was usually seen spending time with "normal people".

So you oppose him acting as a "moral" leader, voicing out against things and etc.

Should they handle it themselves? No. But I don't see why they can't establish a presidential organization or branch, and by that I mean a part of the government like congress that consists of a group of people who are in charge of handling domestic/internal affairs such as this that are overseen by the president/prime minister.

This is of course assuming they really give a **** and aren't the crooked politicians.

Well there are plenty of those already,only issue is.. that switching presidents after 8 years really doesn't help with the consistency, and who people want to follow.

All I'm going to say is no, because giving too much responsibility will lead to giving more power which can result in a tyranny if one entity receives too much. Every task should be equally separated so as to prevent a certain person/group from becoming too strong

well, not giving responsibility, but just discussing if they themselves should take responsibility.

Also "equally" seperated.. o-o i don't think there is a government that is equally seperated.

 

[BlacLord™]

prime minister is usually the one with more power in those countries. Or atleast the one that acts as the "poster boy" or the "leader".

In France, it's the opposite.

 

[KingHashirama]

In France, it's the opposite.

hence the "usually" ;p

 

[ministerC4]

MinisterC4 approves this message.U_U