Power is what drives people to influence change on the world around them.

It can help
in creating peace by developing the area around while influencing the people to support
that development. But there are always two sides to a coin, giving power to someone
can lead them to become greedy for more and more power. This can lead to someone
ruling a region with an iron fist. There are many examples in the real world where power
has been used to develop a region but has also been seen to destroy the region out of
greed.

When it comes to the development of a country there must be a leader to take

leadership and lead the citizens of the country for a better developed future for the
country. There will also have to be times where conflict can lead to a better future as
well. Some great examples of power being important for development are the
Napoleonic wars, the russian revolution, the american civil wars.

After the coalitions, Napoleon had extreme amounts of power becoming a sort of
dictator for France, Napoleon overhauled the legal system with what is referred to as
the Napoleonic Code. It is highly centralized and conservative while property rights,
freedom of conscience and other liberal concepts are contained in it. Hidden in it were
the underpinnings of a police state and eventually a network of informers run by a state
police bureaucracy. The law was patriarchal, and had limited rights and traditional roles
for women. Political dissidence was severely suppressed. Napoleon also reformed the
Educational institutions. The Catholic Church heavily influenced education and
Napoleon wanted to create a cadre of government workers free of church influence. It
was heavily favored to support the military. Of course he had to pull some strings to get
his way but his power and his ambition for a greater position and his will for a better
future for france. But this didn’t last long as it had fallen in 1814.

The transition from the Russian Empire to the Soviet Union had answered the questions
of who would lead and how they would lead. Now the question was, how would they
maintain power? While the notion of capitalism had been around for over a century,
communism seemed fresh and young. So, how would a young communist Russia
survive within a world of capitalist nations? And how would it do so within this
geographically vast and socially diverse country that it was hoping—even forcing—to
unite under this new way of building community? As you continue to learn the history
that followed this one moment, you'll see that these challenges had a huge impact.
These challenges would not only change one country in one year. They would change
the course of world history for the remainder of the twentieth century.

When it comes to the american revolution the balance of power and control played a
massive part of it all even after the revolution. The Revolution also unleashed powerful
political, social, and economic forces that would transform the post-Revolution politics
and society, including increased participation in politics and governance, the legal
institutionalization of religious toleration, and the growth and diffusion of the population.
The Revolution also had significant short-term effects on the lives of women in the new
United States of America. In the long-term, the Revolution would also have significant
effects on the lives of slaves and free blacks as well as the institution of slavery itself. It
also affected Native Americans by opening up western settlement and creating
governments hostile to their territorial claims. Even more broadly, the Revolution ended
the mercantilist economy, opening new opportunities in trade and manufacturing.

Understanding the Kim regime's resilience requires an understanding of the

tools it has used to stay in power. The first is social engineering—creating a
country where the very building blocks of opposition are lacking. North Korea
has no merchant or land-owning class, independent unions, or clergy.
Intellectuals are regime-loyal bureaucrats, not dissidents, and strict
restrictions on the activities of students have cowed them into submission.

Second, the regime pushes an ideology. The Supreme Leader (suryong) system
established Kim Il-sung as the center of a cult of personality. At the core of the
regime's juche ideology is nationalism with a xenophobic, even racist, slant.
Anti-Japanese sentiment, hostility to South Korea, and propaganda against the
United States create legitimacy for the regime. As the regime inculcates its
ideology and cult of personality, it strives for tighter controls on information.
In the 1990s, after the famine, the regime's control of information decreased
and cross-border smuggling grew, but recently the regime has tried to reassert
its control.

Perhaps most important, the North Korean regime is brutal in its use of force.
Dissent is detected through an elaborate network of informants working for
multiple internal security agencies. People accused of relatively minor offenses
undergo "reeducation"; those accused of more serious transgressions are
either immediately executed or interred in miserable political prison camps.
Even more daunting, according to the "three generations" policy, the regime
punishes not only the individual responsible for the transgressions but his or
her whole family.