If political leaders are humans too and can make mistakes which can have can affect their reputation, why can't we have robots? Since we programme and control what they do and say. However, what they say wouldn't come from the heart, it would come from programming. Here is my point of view about it:
The reason I think robots would be a good leader in politics is that robots never get stressed or tired, so they will always be welcoming when someone approaches them (if they are programmed to do so). Also, the human brain gets tried when they are working non-stop but robots never get tired and can work up to 24x7! n addition, you do not have to pay robots any money, and the cost of them is gradually diminishing! Robots are more precise than humans. For example, when saying a speech they do not stutter or say something that will upset the crowd, they are also controlled by us, so they can never disagree to any assignments we tell them to complete. Robots can be also used everywhere whereas human safety is a huge concern. Robots are independent. So, we would not need a government as a robot could do one thing all by themselves. If we had had robots in the past, the 2009 scandal would not have occurred as robots can stay in one place and do not need transport meaning the would not need expenses not to mention that robots will only do what they are programmed to do.
If robots were to be our political leaders, it can put some people out of work as human labour would no more be needed. Also, robots can only carry out things they are told to do, so if suddenly something happened to them, they would be able to cope with it whereas humans could easily understand the situation. Another reason why robots should not be our leaders is that they have no emotions, meaning they lack empathy and this is one of the worst disadvantages of working with something emotionless. The function of a robot relies on the chip, if one thing goes wrong, it would require reprogramming which would affect the business. We would still be far more intelligent than robots as they would not be able to manage difficult decisions. or example, making a law would be different as they do not have a mind of their own and their creativity would not be from caring, but coding. When a robot is programmed, it is only made by a small number of people, meaning what those people put may not be what others want to hear. Since the whole company can not be overrun by robots, employees would ahve to learn how to cope with robots, which would be very expensive.
What do you think should happen? Should we have robots or not?
Thank you for reading.