Genghis Khan: A Negative Leader

Genghis Khan is a negative leader because of his ruthless conquests that caused the disestablishment of many civilizations. Additionally, the cruelty towards his prisoners and outsider women shows how he lacked morality. In 1240, Khan is noted for, "destroy[ing] Kiev, then the capital of the 'Borderlands'." (Genghis Khan and the Mongolian Empire). Khan's mission towards conquest led to the fall of the prosperous Kiev, with no true reason beyond the expansion of the empire. Additionally, Khan's cruelty towards women in Europe, such as "indulging in the rape of little girls and nuns before killing them, [and] skinned them alive." The lack of respect for other people showed his lack of morality and thus his connotation of a negative leader.

Genghis Khan's legacy should not be justified by the way that people today see him. While he was a major hero for the Mongolian people, his lack of respect for foreign policy (ie the abuse of women and the torture of non-Mongolians) showed how he was not a good leader. Where a supporter of Khan would say that he was a good leader because he expanded Mongolian trade, do you believe that trade overpowers the loss of millions of lives in order to achieve it?

Comment Stream

3 years ago