The Relationship Between the Country and Its Citizens

The government is always confused about how to manage the citizens best. Be tolerated, strict or confined? The relationship between the government and citizens is hard to be defined. In my own country, especially the Chinese Mainland, it is more like affiliation. The government represents the authority and it leads the public. In most cases, the general publics only obey the authority. Even the government give people rights, they seldom bear their particular opinions which are against the government. Instead, in Taiwan, the public’s attitudes to the government are more radical. They have various political parties, and citizens can vote anyone they support. It is more like a sort of egalitarian.

The factors to determine the relationship are complex. Indeed, the government cannot give loose to the general public. Although part of people break the law due to moral reasons, the majorities just break the rule. Obviously, no limitation will cause chaos and it is fatal for a country. The law is hard to consider all the situations but comparatively it is impartial. In a society which absolute fair does not exist, the law is the best standard to judge and weigh what should do or what shouldn’t do. Moreover, it is responsible for the government to amend the law to satisfy as many as possible real situations.

In contrast, imposing too many restrictions is also irrational. The extreme limitation will lead to two distinct results. One is the general public always follow the country’s advice. They don’t have their own thinking or deliberation. The only thing they know is obeying. However, as we know, ‘A nation without a thought is terrible’, the country is hopeless. In the exact opposite, restriction will cause activists to do something radical to fight against the ‘authority’. The June 4 incident of 1989 is a typical case. The Chinese government confined the suggestions proposed by the public and take military actions to suppress them. That caused the activists to march, petition and fight against the government. Then, the relationship between the government and citizens became rigid and irreparable. The activists indeed broke the laws, however, their purpose was to pursue the freedom and their ideal Utopia. Were they wrong in the moral aspect? We may say not. In my own perspective, I would support these activists. To aspire my own conviction, I may do something like these activists did even which breaks the law. Thus, it is the perception confliction between the government and the general public causing their relationship become a problem.