Justifications to Hold Power

The Mandate of Heaven is a justification for ruling based on the idea that one is chosen to govern because his or her moral code is aligned with that of a “cosmic all-pervading power.”  Though it may seem unfair to citizens that a leader could claim approval from a higher power, I believe that the Mandate of Heaven was the most morally acceptable justification to rule in lieu of leaders being democratically elected. 

Throughout millennium, leaders have used a variety of justifications to legitimize their power. An example of these justifications was the Mandate of Heaven, an idea that a cosmic force concurred with a leader’s moral code. Another example of a religious justification for power was the Divine Right of Kings. Of course, neither of these justifications could have actually been proven true, because as far as people knew, no leader was told by God that he/she had the right to lead.  Despite the manipulation involved, I believe that between the Divine Right of Kings and the Mandate of Heaven, the Mandate of Heaven was the more morally responsible justification for a leader to have. 

When a leader used the Mandate of Heaven to justify his reason to lead, he claimed that the previous leader did not have the right virtues. The individual with the correct virtues was consequently able to overthrow the morally compromised predecessor. This might have given someone the appearance of being a self-serving, power-hungry individual, but the basis for this reasoning nonetheless influenced individuals to assume leadership with a moral code.  If a leader used the Mandate of Heaven to justify his reason for leading, then he must have led a life with good virtues. Otherwise, he would look like a hypocrite. A government that was run based off of a moral code and humaneness would have functioned much more smoothly.  In the interest of self-preservation, a government would have had to had to show that its moral code was acceptable so another government could not claim that its virtues were superior.  The competition for power fueled by moral codes ideally might have influenced leaders to strengthen their moral codes.

It was not until the development of democracy that leaders no longer needed justification from a higher power for their right to lead. A leader’s given right to hold power was simple; he or she had been chosen by the people.

All in all, the Mandate of Heaven may have not been a fair claim to leadership, but it was the most morally responsible justification to lead in lieu of a democracy.