ESSAY QUESTION:
"The purpose of government is not to ensure the financial well-being of its citizens, but rather to maintain order."
From your perspective, how accurate is the above statement? Support your position with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The statement that the purpose of government is not to ensure the financial well-being of its citizens, but rather to maintain order doesn't fit the ideology of the contemporary world. The statement implies that even if the denizens live in penury, the purpose of the government is fulfilled as long as there is no anarchy in the society. It fails to take into account the relationship between financial well being of the citizens and order in the society.
A government's primary role is to ensure the well being - social, financial and physical- of its citizens. If it fails in any one of these, the native people would face problems and if these problems culminate into an epidemic, it would disrupt the order of the society. Thus, financial soundness is somewhat related to order in the society. A government's whose prime focus is on maintaining order rules by force and creates discontentment among its citizens.
For instance, take the case of India as ruled by two Mughal emperors - Akbar and Aurangzeb. Both were able to maintain order in the society but their approach were contrasting. While Akbar focussed on the well being of his subjects, Aurangzeb wielded brute force to control his subjects. Accordingly, the people were happy during the reign of Akbar whereas poverty spread during the reign of Aurangzeb and there was widespread discontent among people. After Aurangzeb died, the society crumbled.
Hence, it can be concluded that maintaining order is not the sole purpose of the government but one of its many purposes. Ensuring financial well being of its citizens is as important, if not more, as maintaining order in the society.
"The purpose of government is not to ensure the financial well-being of its citizens, but rather to maintain order."
From your perspective, how accurate is the above statement? Support your position with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The statement that the purpose of government is not to ensure the financial well-being of its citizens, but rather to maintain order doesn't fit the ideology of the contemporary world. The statement implies that even if the denizens live in penury, the purpose of the government is fulfilled as long as there is no anarchy in the society. It fails to take into account the relationship between financial well being of the citizens and order in the society.
A government's primary role is to ensure the well being - social, financial and physical- of its citizens. If it fails in any one of these, the native people would face problems and if these problems culminate into an epidemic, it would disrupt the order of the society. Thus, financial soundness is somewhat related to order in the society. A government's whose prime focus is on maintaining order rules by force and creates discontentment among its citizens.
For instance, take the case of India as ruled by two Mughal emperors - Akbar and Aurangzeb. Both were able to maintain order in the society but their approach were contrasting. While Akbar focussed on the well being of his subjects, Aurangzeb wielded brute force to control his subjects. Accordingly, the people were happy during the reign of Akbar whereas poverty spread during the reign of Aurangzeb and there was widespread discontent among people. After Aurangzeb died, the society crumbled.
Hence, it can be concluded that maintaining order is not the sole purpose of the government but one of its many purposes. Ensuring financial well being of its citizens is as important, if not more, as maintaining order in the society.
