I know! Believe me, I'm not a bad chap! We can be friends.
What is your age?
Okay, question:
A, B, C are two friends. They went to see a movie. The contents were simple. A public hero becoming the CM of a particular state, and after becoming so, he made big changes to his state. A said it's possible and that the country needs these people. B said that rule without institutions is dangerous. C said it's all fantasy. What do you reckon, is C true? Give reason.
Answers
I agree with B and C
Rule without institutions is indeed very dangerous. Besides, no democratic country can function without institutions. We have three tiers of government in India, all placed at the same level. This is known as horizontal distribution of power, where every institution checks that the powers that have been assigned to the other tiers of government, are being used fairly. This is also known as check and balance system, which ensures that no governmental body misuses its powers.
Also, as C said, this movie is devoid of reality. Of course, I'm not implying that such politicians with good intentions do not exist, but this case is too 'utopian', or 'ideal'
On the other hand, A is also correct. Our country does need such selfless people, who are eager to work for the betterment and welfare of our society. But people are not always that 'selfless'. If they gain much popularity, they are more likely to get greedier and corrupt.
In any case, it's always best if powers are distributed amongst different tiers of the government.
PS- I'm also an Audrey Hepburn fan ;)