Therefore, when adopting opposition approach, the leader has to consider how much benefit his people can get from the opposition. Although violent revolution has its necessity in some extreme cases, such as when the government is completely selfish and works only for its personal interest, or when the government has lost its ability to provide stable life to its people, it should not be considered for most of cases in nowadays. The leader is qualified to use violent revolution as his approach when he can promise a better life to his follower after the old government is overthrown. The violent revolution destroyed the order which maintain the basic function of the society. In most of cases in modern time, such as Syria and Iraq, the violent revolution leads to endless civil war or a government has no ability to control the area. People's life became even worse than what was before the revolution. The violent revolution cannot better people's life in most of cases. Thus, it is not the best choice for
Therefore, when adopting opposition approach, the leader has to consider how much benefit his people can get from the opposition. Although violent revolution has its necessity in some extreme cases, such as when the government is completely selfish and works only for its personal interest, or when the government has lost its ability to provide stable life to its people, it should not be considered for most of cases in nowadays. The leader is qualified to use violent revolution as his approach when he can promise a better life to his follower after the old government is overthrown. The violent revolution destroyed the order which maintain the basic function of the society. In most of cases in modern time, such as Syria and Iraq, the violent revolution leads to endless civil war or a government has no ability to control the area. People's life became even worse than what was before the revolution. The violent revolution cannot better people's life in most of cases. Thus, it is not the best choice for