I thought this documentary was a great example of the different types of leaders we actually see in politics. Luo Lei uses his physical strength to assert his dominance. Furthermore, he uses his father’s position as a police officer to take his class on a field trip and win over their votes. Cheng Cheng on the other hand is a leader of charisma. He goes around the room after his speech telling his classmates that they have “good karma” and manipulates his classmates to vote him by promising them positions if they vote for him. With classic campaign drama, the 7 year olds point out everything that is wrong with the other candidates. Cheng Cheng accuses Luo Lei of being a dictator and a fascist because of his use of violence. He also accuses Xiaofei of having no confidence, and being too soft to be a good leader. However this wasn’t enough since Luo Lei still ended up winning the election. Clearly this is democracy in action as we’ve observed the typical political tools used by the 7 year olds.
Introduction to Comparative Politics: Nationalism, Ideology, and State Power
Professor Shervin Malekzadeh
I would agree with this comparison. The value that Luo Lei’s parents were to his campaign cannot be overlooked. Candidates like Xiaofei and Cheng Cheng cannot compete with support like the class trip.
I agree that this election for Class Monitor closely resembled a democratic election in action. Like you point out, these kids use many of the campaign strategies employed by politicians in democracies, which was surprising to me since they probably have not had much exposure to elections. In the beginning of the documentary, many kids don’t even know the definition of democracy. Though it seemed like Cheng Cheng would win as the most charismatic candidate, in the end the one with the most monetary support won, not unlike a typical democratic election.