by Cody Hodge

Created on: February 01, 2009   Last Updated: January 16, 2010

They say that nice guys will always finish last. It seems that when it comes to political power, those who are nice generally will get stabbed in the back, literally. If you look at any great political force, they always had one thing going for them, and that was military might. Whether it be Rome, whether it be the British empire, or any empire in between, the nation that was in control had the most effective military. When it came to the individual leaders themselves, those who stayed in power had a firm grip on that nations military.

The United States is a democracy, and a civilian is in control of the military. This is done to ensure that the military wing of the government, and the executive wing of the government are not directly connected. This is a very good thing, because when one takes a look at other nations, where dictators, or former army generals rule, those nations tend to not fare so well.

When one looks at Zimbabwe, and Myanmar for example, we see this principle. Mugabe will not be pushed out of office anytime soon because he is in control of his nations army. They are loyal to him, and he has them at his disposal when it comes to snuffing out dissent. In Myanmar, the government is run directly by the military, and is the end all, be all when it comes to political power in the nation.

Why do most leaders use violence to maintain power? Well, it is only natural to want to rule forever, and reap the rewards of being the ruler. Sometimes absolute power is all a man has, and without it he is nothing. It could be that the glory of being a head of state is just too much to let go of, and so a leader refuses to step down, and other times being the leader of a nation is the only thing that keeps them alive, or making money.

If you are the leader of a corrupt nation, the only way you profit is to be the head of state. The only way for others to profit off of you is to be in your circle, and sometimes, the only way for the leader of a nation to stay alive is to continue profiting for those in his circle. I can't imagine that most leaders of corrupt nations would have as good of a life, or live in the same kind of safety if they were to suddenly lose power.

Out of this need for preservation, rulers will use force to maintain the status quo. If a nation is rebelling, the army can come in and quell the violence, and again, this is why a ruler needs to have control of his army to maintain his rule, if he is not elected by the people. If a population knows it will be punished if they don't vote for a leader, they will be more likely to keep a man in office, so that they are safe. I don't think it was out of happiness that people routinely voted for Saddam Hussein.

So, the relationship between violence and political power is quite clear. If a leader threatens to kill you if you don't vote for him, and he has the means to do so, you will vote for him. If a nation has the means to overrun your nation if you don't submit, then you are better off submitting to that rule, unless you are willing to die for your freedom.

Politics, much like life, is survival of the fittest, and it sometimes is easier for some to live in fear, then to not live at all. Some people are willing to capitalize on this to make sure they stay in power for as long as possible. It is unfortunate, but it is the way it is in the world today.

Learn more about this author, Cody Hodge.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.