Leaders are created by the demands that are placed on them.
Leaders play important roles in facilitating the operation of organizations, but what factors contribute the most to making a leader has consistently been discussed. Some people advocate that demands originating from the environment create leaders. While I recognize the merit of this argument, I am at odds with this proposal in terms of its comprehensiveness and believe the statement is only held in emergent situations. On the contrary, during a stable and peaceful period, leaders rely on the support from formal institutions and their own talents.
To begin with, we are reasonable to claim some talents become leaders in response to the demands of specific environments, where threats are obvious and rule of law is weak. For instance, because of the Great Depression, President F.D. Roosevelt, thus, could defeat Republican candidates, by a large margin, whose party had lived in the white house for several decades. In the 1920s and 1930s, the U.S. citizens were asking a person who could lead the country to go out of the economic recession as well as make a peaceful world. Therefore, Roosevelt could be elected as the president for four terms. We have also observed other examples in other countries which are experiencing chaos and wars, such as Mao Zedong, who as a student, becoming a leader due to the demand for the independence of Chinese. Therefore, these cases demonstrate specific environments, where people are prioritizing reforms and revolutions, could give rise to strong leaders.
However, we cannot turn a blind eye to other time periods. When the economic and diplomatic conditions are stable, if not booming, there is no consensus among citizens or no demand at all. In such a circumstance, it is formal institutions, such as election, that mainly create leaders instead of specific needs. The most recent case is the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Catering to the demands of the middle class and women, the Democratic candidate, Mrs. Clinton, won the majority of votes but did not become the U.S. President. Her failure, therefore, had more to do with the American special election system. Consequently, the aforementioned argument becomes is open to dispute when faced with this situation.
Furthermore, besides institutions, we also cannot ignore the roles of talents and other characters of the individual in forming a leader. Without prerequisite quality, a person does not have the potential to gain the leadership even with a strong demand. When faced with the same demands from German to resue the economy, it was Hitler’s expertise in speech that made him the premier of Germany rather than the leaders from socialist parties? For instance, in the field of international political economy, without doubt, Prof. David Lake is a leading scholar. His success hinges more on his contributions to the academy and energy invested in fostering younger scholars rather than meeting any necessary demands. In other words, individual ability should be first taken into considerations in examining the validity of the statement.
To summarize, as I have manifested above, we cannot deny attributing the leadership to the demands from citizens, especially when the demands are exceptionally strong. However, for most cases, we should pay attention to and assign priority to institutions and the nature of individuals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 840, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...xamining the validity of the statement. To summarize, as I have manifested above...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, such as, as well as, in other words, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2832.0 2235.4752809 127% => OK
No of words: 533.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31332082552 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80487177365 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03183456184 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 303.0 215.323595506 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568480300188 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 894.6 704.065955056 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.38483146067 296% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.8245296446 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.888888889 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7407407407 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.74074074074 5.21951772744 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189598058392 0.243740707755 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0451659602138 0.0831039109588 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0553859034745 0.0758088955206 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108672778094 0.150359130593 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0324355930379 0.0667264976115 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 156.0 100.480337079 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.