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.
Preparing young people for leadership in government, industry or other fields requires a sense of cooperation and teamwork. It is therefore imperative for young people to be acclimatized to such conditions from an early age. A competitive temperament, albeit useful is not best suited for positions of national interest.
The shortcomings of competition are twofold. Firstly, there are no friends in a competition, everyone is treated as an opponent. Such a restrictive mindset will not be particularly useful in governance or industry. For instance, an able leader is one who is capable of acknowledging dissenting opinions and making informed choices. If he were bred in a competitive environment, then his propensity to make dogmatic and sectarian decisions increases. Such a leader only takes into the account the well-being of his peers and well-wishers and not his adversaries. Contrast this with someone who has been<span class="hiddenSpellError" pre="been "></span> taught to be cooperative. Such a leader not only acknowledges dissent, but appreciates it as well. People like Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks are some popular examples of this kind of leadership.
Leading a government is a lot like running a marathon and not a sprint. At several points in time, a leader might have to encounter fatigue, demoralization and enervation. In order to galvanize his coworkers or subordinates, a leader should listen to their concerns and work towards alleviating them. A competitive person is more likely to view these disadvantaged voices as an obstacle to his pursuits. Being goal-oriented is an inherently acceptable trait. But in doing so, one must not stifle the successes of others. A good business leader is one who treats his rivals as propellants and not barricades. For example, a mining baron decided to use the proliferation of his competitors as an opportunity to diversify his interests. If he were to have retaliated against his competition, it would have resulted in disastrous economic and personal consequences.
To underscore the demerits of competition, one must also appreciate the overarching advantages of camaraderie and munificence. The adage "You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is of particular relevance here. There have been umpteen examples of warring nations resolving their differences amicably by engaging in a consistent dialogue. On the other hand, leaders who choose to be vituperative or vitriolic not only endanger the safety of their people, but also create a sense of alienation between the dispensation and the electorate. The United States and Russia for years had nurtured mutual animosity. This infamously led to the cold war and other proxy conflagrations. This belligerence can be traced back to a competitive upbringing on both sides. The leaders are constantly told that in a man-eat-man world, the only way to succeed is to vanquish your enemies. Little do they realize that the same can be achieved by listening and addressing issues of contention.
It is therefore amply clear that competitive upbringing is detrimental to national interests. Detractors of this argument may claim that cooperation fosters weakness and insecurity. They could not be farther from the truth. Gandhi, in his civil disobedience movement, included his oppressors as legitimate voices of interest and in the end emerged triumphant. One should therefore disregard conflict and competition and ensure that the universal traits of peace and brotherhood are instilled from an embryonic stage in one's personal learning process.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 521, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...re instilled from an embryonic stage in ones personal learning process.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, well, for example, for instance, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 14.8657303371 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3057.0 2235.4752809 137% => OK
No of words: 556.0 442.535393258 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49820143885 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.50551472422 2.79657885939 125% => OK
Unique words: 314.0 215.323595506 146% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564748201439 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 981.9 704.065955056 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 35.0 20.2370786517 173% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.907509252 60.3974514979 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 87.3428571429 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8857142857 23.4991977007 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.51428571429 5.21951772744 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.2758426966 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162877697195 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368388705524 0.0831039109588 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783147484305 0.0758088955206 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114010775387 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.137284669291 0.0667264976115 206% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 39.33 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.32 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 180.0 100.480337079 179% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.